revoframework/Revo

Executive summary

revoframework/Revo scores 48 out of 100 and is rated Weak, while five of its seven lenses score higher still: Event Sourcing at 82 and Architecture at 78, both rated Strong, and Security and Compliance at 67, Performance at 60 and Maturity at 50, all rated Adequate.

The score is lower than those five because the weakest lens counts most, and here that is Production Readiness, which scores 44 and is rated Weak. Its Security & performance tooling dimension scores 0 out of 10, and until that reaches 4, Production Readiness can't be rated higher than Adequate. The first actions are to resolve the 1 Vulnerable finding(s) in Dependency Hygiene and to resolve the 7 WriteOnlyPrivateField finding(s) in Explicit Debt, and if Production Readiness rose to 70, the score would rise from 48 to about 52.

36 findings are critical: nine in Secrets (history), seven in Explicit Debt, six in Project dependency cycles, five in Dependency Vulnerabilities, four in Static Analysis (SAST), one in Async correctness, one in Dependency Hygiene, one in Dependency direction, one in Immutable events and one in Test Quality.

The product code is 26,985 lines, which would take an estimated 0.4 person-years, around €63,000, to rebuild.

Code Health 44 Weak, capped by Structured logging and Nullable reference types Architecture 78 Strong Maturity 50 Adequate, capped by Architecture documentation Production Readiness 44 Weak, capped by Security & performance tooling Security and Compliance 67 Adequate, capped by Secrets (history) Event Sourcing 82 Strong Performance 60 Adequate

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

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

Production Readiness 44 · counts for 46%Code Health 44 · counts for 25%Maturity 50 · counts for 14%Performance 60 · counts for 8%Security and Compliance 67 · counts for 4%Architecture 78 · counts for 2%Event Sourcing 82 · counts for 1%

If Production Readiness rose from 44 to 70, the lowest score rated Strong, the score would rise from 48 to about 52.

Code composition: what the lines of code are

Business logic 15%Supporting code 51%Tests 34%

New since the last survey: 180 findings

These 180 critical or serious findings weren't in the previous survey, on 7 October 2026. The first 100 are listed here, and the findings file in the download package lists them all.

Code Duplication · Members sharing a duplicated core (4 members, 50+ identical tokens) Providers/EF6/Revo.EF6/DataAccess/Entities/EF6CrudRepository.cs
Code Duplication · Duplicated block (33–36 lines × 2) Providers/EF6/Revo.EF6/DataAccess/Entities/EF6CrudRepository.cs
Code Duplication · Duplicated block (17–20 lines × 4) Providers/EF6/Revo.EF6/DataAccess/Entities/EF6CrudRepository.cs
Code Coverage · CRAP 56: LowerCaseConvention.Finalize Providers/EFCore/Revo.EFCore/DataAccess/Conventions/LowerCaseConvention.cs
Dependency Hygiene · Deprecated: xunit Tests/Revo.Core.Tests/Revo.Core.Tests.csproj
Dependency Hygiene · Deprecated: xunit Tests/Revo.Domain.Tests/Revo.Domain.Tests.csproj
Dependency Hygiene · Deprecated: xunit Tests/Revo.DataAccess.Tests/Revo.DataAccess.Tests.csproj
Dependency Hygiene · Deprecated: xunit Tests/Revo.Infrastructure.Tests/Revo.Infrastructure.Tests.csproj
Dependency Hygiene · Deprecated: xunit Providers/EF6/Tests/Revo.EF6.Tests/Revo.EF6.Tests.csproj
Dependency Hygiene · Deprecated: xunit Extensions/Tests/Revo.Extensions.History.Tests/Revo.Extensions.History.Tests.csproj
Dependency Hygiene · Deprecated: xunit Extensions/Tests/Revo.Extensions.Notifications.Tests/Revo.Extensions.Notifications.Tests.csproj
Dependency Hygiene · Deprecated: xunit Providers/AspNetCore/Tests/Revo.AspNetCore.Tests/Revo.AspNetCore.Tests.csproj
Dependency Hygiene · Deprecated: xunit Providers/EFCore/Tests/Revo.EFCore.Tests/Revo.EFCore.Tests.csproj
Dependency Hygiene · Deprecated: xunit Examples/Todos/Revo.Examples.Todos.Tests/Revo.Examples.Todos.Tests.csproj
Dependency Hygiene · Deprecated: xunit Providers/EasyNetQ/Tests/Revo.EasyNetQ.Tests/Revo.EasyNetQ.Tests.csproj
Explicit Debt · Dead code: ToSeparatedString Revo.Core/Collections/Extensions.cs
Explicit Debt · Dead code: AsNotNull Revo.Core/Collections/Extensions.cs
Explicit Debt · Dead code: WithTenantContext Revo.Core/Commands/CommandExecutionOptions.cs
Explicit Debt · Dead code: EntityQueryWithContext Revo.Core/Commands/EntityQueryWithContext.cs
Explicit Debt · Dead code: RemoveRoute Revo.Core/Commands/ICommandRouter.cs
Explicit Debt · Dead code: ICommandWithContext Revo.Core/Commands/ICommandWithContext.cs
Explicit Debt · Dead code: Memcmp Revo.Core/Core/MemoryUtils.cs
Explicit Debt · Dead code: InRequestOrJobScope Revo.Core/Core/NinjectBindingExtensions.cs
Explicit Debt · Dead code: IndexOfI Revo.Core/Core/StringExtensions.cs
Explicit Debt · Dead code: IndexOfI Revo.Core/Core/StringExtensions.cs
Explicit Debt · Dead code: IndexOfI Revo.Core/Core/StringExtensions.cs
Explicit Debt · Dead code: LastIndexOfI Revo.Core/Core/StringExtensions.cs
Explicit Debt · Dead code: RemoveLastBackslash Revo.Core/Core/StringExtensions.cs
Explicit Debt · Dead code: RemoveDiacritics Revo.Core/Core/StringExtensions.cs
Explicit Debt · Dead code: IResourceManager Revo.Core/IO/Resources/IResourceManager.cs
Explicit Debt · Dead code: GetPermissionTypeByName Revo.Core/Security/IPermissionTypeRegistry.cs
Explicit Debt · Dead code: ITransactionListener Revo.Core/Transactions/ITransactionListener.cs
Explicit Debt · Dead code: CreateTransaction Revo.Core/Transactions/ITransactionProvider.cs
Explicit Debt · Dead code: FindType Revo.Core/Types/ITypeExplorer.cs
Explicit Debt · Dead code: ClassEntityDto Revo.Domain/Dto/ClassEntityDto.cs
Explicit Debt · Dead code: BasicClassEntity Revo.Domain/Entities/Basic/BasicClassEntity.cs
Explicit Debt · Dead code: GetPublishDate Revo.Domain/Events/MetadataExtensions.cs
Explicit Debt · Dead code: GetStoreDate Revo.Domain/Events/MetadataExtensions.cs
Explicit Debt · Dead code: GetUserId Revo.Domain/Events/MetadataExtensions.cs
Explicit Debt · Dead code: ClassEntityView Revo.Domain/ReadModel/ClassEntityView.cs
Explicit Debt · Dead code: EventEntityReadModel Revo.Domain/ReadModel/EventEntityReadModel.cs
Explicit Debt · Dead code: TenantBasicAggregateRoot Revo.Domain/Tenancy/TenantBasicAggregateRoot.cs
Explicit Debt · Dead code: TenantBasicClassAggregateRoot Revo.Domain/Tenancy/TenantBasicClassAggregateRoot.cs
Explicit Debt · Dead code: TenantEntityView Revo.Domain/Tenancy/TenantEntityView.cs
Explicit Debt · Dead code: TenantEventSourcedAggregateRoot Revo.Domain/Tenancy/TenantEventSourcedAggregateRoot.cs
Explicit Debt · Dead code: TenantReadModelBase Revo.Domain/Tenancy/TenantReadModelBase.cs
Explicit Debt · Dead code: AssertAllEvents Revo.Testing/Infrastructure/EventSourcedEntityTestingHelpers.cs
Explicit Debt · Dead code: AssertAllEvents Revo.Testing/Infrastructure/EventSourcedEntityTestingHelpers.cs
Explicit Debt · Dead code: AssertAllEvents Revo.Testing/Infrastructure/EventSourcedEntityTestingHelpers.cs
Explicit Debt · Dead code: SetFakeUser Revo.Testing/Security/FakeUserContext.cs
Explicit Debt · Dead code: SubstituteDecorator Revo.Testing/SubstituteDecorator.cs
Explicit Debt · Dead code: MailBufferedNotificationChannel Extensions/Revo.Extensions.Notifications/Channels/Mail/MailBufferedNotificationChannel.cs
Explicit Debt · Dead code: ConfigureMailNotifications Extensions/Revo.Extensions.Notifications/Channels/Mail/MailNotificationConfigurationExtensions.cs
Explicit Debt · Dead code: SmtpMailNotificationSender Extensions/Revo.Extensions.Notifications/Channels/Mail/SmtpMailNotificationSender.cs
Explicit Debt · Dead code: AddNotificationsExtension Extensions/Revo.Extensions.Notifications/Configuration/NotificationsConfigurationExtensions.cs
Explicit Debt · Dead code: IGroupedNotifications Extensions/Revo.Extensions.Notifications/IGroupedNotifications.cs
Explicit Debt · Dead code: ChangeDataAs Extensions/Revo.Extensions.History/ChangeTracking/TrackedChange.cs
Explicit Debt · Dead code: AddHistoryExtension Extensions/Revo.Extensions.History/Configuration/HistoryConfigurationExtensions.cs
Explicit Debt · Dead code: CreateGetIdPropertyExpression Revo.DataAccess/Entities/EntityExpressionUtils.cs
Explicit Debt · Dead code: ExcludeFilters Revo.DataAccess/Entities/IFilteringRepository.cs
Explicit Debt · Dead code: GetById Revo.DataAccess/Entities/QueryableRepositoryExtensions.cs
Explicit Debt · Dead code: GetByIdAsync Revo.DataAccess/Entities/QueryableRepositoryExtensions.cs
Explicit Debt · Dead code: ExcludeFilters Revo.DataAccess/Entities/ReadRepositoryExtensions.cs
Explicit Debt · Dead code: ExcludeFilters Revo.DataAccess/Entities/ReadRepositoryExtensions.cs
Explicit Debt · Dead code: DatabaseInitializerStub Revo.Infrastructure/DataAccess/DatabaseInitializerStub.cs
Explicit Debt · Dead code: DatabaseMigrationCommandHandler Revo.Infrastructure/DataAccess/Migrations/DatabaseMigrationCommandHandler.cs
Explicit Debt · Dead code: AddParent Revo.Infrastructure/DataAccess/Migrations/DatabaseMigrationNode.cs
Explicit Debt · Dead code: AddChild Revo.Infrastructure/DataAccess/Migrations/DatabaseMigrationNode.cs
Explicit Debt · Dead code: BindAsyncEventListener Revo.Infrastructure/Events/Async/AsyncEventListenerBindingExtensions.cs
Explicit Debt · Dead code: BindAsyncEventListener Revo.Infrastructure/Events/Async/AsyncEventListenerBindingExtensions.cs
Explicit Debt · Dead code: PerAggregateAsyncEventSequencer Revo.Infrastructure/Events/Async/PerAggregateAsyncEventSequencer{}.cs
Explicit Debt · Dead code: PerTenantAsyncEventSequencer Revo.Infrastructure/Events/Async/PerTenantAsyncEventSequencer{}.cs
Explicit Debt · Dead code: GetAllEventsBackwardsAsync Revo.Infrastructure/EventStores/IEventStore.cs
Explicit Debt · Dead code: EnqueueJobCommandHandler Revo.Infrastructure/Jobs/EnqueueJobCommandHandler.cs
Explicit Debt · Dead code: AddOrUpdateRecurringJobAsync Revo.Infrastructure/Jobs/IJobScheduler.cs
Explicit Debt · Dead code: RemoveRecurringJobIfExists Revo.Infrastructure/Jobs/IJobScheduler.cs
Explicit Debt · Dead code: DeleteScheduleJobAsync Revo.Infrastructure/Jobs/IJobScheduler.cs
Explicit Debt · Dead code: ScheduleJobCommandHandler Revo.Infrastructure/Jobs/ScheduleJobCommandHandler.cs
Explicit Debt · Dead code: GetTrackedAggregates Revo.Infrastructure/Repositories/IAggregateStore.cs
Explicit Debt · Dead code: CreateRepository Revo.Infrastructure/Repositories/IRepositoryFactory.cs
Explicit Debt · Dead code: SagasConfiguration Revo.Infrastructure/Sagas/SagasConfiguration.cs
Explicit Debt · Dead code: HandlesByKey Revo.Infrastructure/Sagas/SagaTypeConfiguration.cs
Explicit Debt · Dead code: HandlesAll Revo.Infrastructure/Sagas/SagaTypeConfiguration.cs
Explicit Debt · Dead code: InTenantSingletonScope Revo.Infrastructure/Tenancy/TenancyNinjectBindingExtension.cs
Explicit Debt · Dead code: UseAllEF6Infrastructure Providers/EF6/Revo.EF6/Configuration/EF6InfrastructureConfigurationExtensions.cs
Explicit Debt · Dead code: ExecuteProcedure Providers/EF6/Revo.EF6/DataAccess/Entities/IEF6DatabaseAccess.cs
Explicit Debt · Dead code: ExecuteProcedureAsync Providers/EF6/Revo.EF6/DataAccess/Entities/IEF6DatabaseAccess.cs
Explicit Debt · Dead code: SqlQueryNontracked Providers/EF6/Revo.EF6/DataAccess/Entities/IEF6DatabaseAccess.cs
Explicit Debt · Dead code: GetSchemaSpaceEntityTypes Providers/EF6/Revo.EF6/DataAccess/Model/IModelMetadataExplorer.cs
Explicit Debt · Dead code: IsTypeMapped Providers/EF6/Revo.EF6/DataAccess/Model/IModelMetadataExplorer.cs
Explicit Debt · Dead code: GetTableNameByClrType Providers/EF6/Revo.EF6/DataAccess/Model/IModelMetadataExplorer.cs
Explicit Debt · Dead code: GetClrTypeByTableName Providers/EF6/Revo.EF6/DataAccess/Model/IModelMetadataExplorer.cs
Explicit Debt · Dead code: HasInheritedColumnName Providers/EF6/Revo.EF6/DataAccess/Model/PrimitivePropertyConfigurationExtensions.cs
Explicit Debt · Dead code: BasicDomainModelDefinition Providers/EF6/Revo.EF6/Domain/BasicDomainModelDefinition.cs
Explicit Debt · Dead code: EF6EntityEventToPocoProjector Providers/EF6/Revo.EF6/Projections/EF6EntityEventToPocoProjector.cs
Explicit Debt · Dead code: EF6EventProjectionOptions Providers/EF6/Revo.EF6/Projections/EF6EventProjectionOptions.cs
Explicit Debt · Dead code: ReadModelDefinition Providers/EF6/Revo.EF6/ReadModel/ReadModelDefinition.cs
Explicit Debt · Dead code: UseHangfire Providers/Hangfire/Revo.Hangfire/HangfireConfigurationExtensions.cs
Explicit Debt · Dead code: ClearConventions Providers/EFCore/Revo.EFCore/DataAccess/Configuration/EFCoreDataAccessConfigurationSection.cs
Explicit Debt · Dead code: RemoveConvention Providers/EFCore/Revo.EFCore/DataAccess/Configuration/EFCoreDataAccessConfigurationSection.cs

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: 23 findings

These 23 critical or serious findings were in the previous survey, on 7 October 2026, and are gone from this one.

Code Duplication · Members sharing a duplicated core (4 members, 50+ identical tokens) Providers/EF6/Revo.EF6/DataAccess/Entities/EF6CrudRepository.cs
Code Duplication · Duplicated block (32–35 lines × 2) Providers/EF6/Revo.EF6/DataAccess/Entities/EF6CrudRepository.cs
Code Duplication · Duplicated block (13–16 lines × 4) Providers/EF6/Revo.EF6/DataAccess/Entities/EF6CrudRepository.cs
Code Coverage · Low coverage: Providers/EFCore/Revo.EFCore/DataAccess/Entities/EFCoreDatabaseAccess.cs Providers/EFCore/Revo.EFCore/DataAccess/Entities/EFCoreDatabaseAccess.cs
Code Coverage · CRAP 56: EF6CrudRepository.FilterSavedEntities Providers/EF6/Revo.EF6/DataAccess/Entities/EF6CrudRepository.cs
Test Quality · No assertions: FilterAdded_AllowsOwnAndCommon Tests/Revo.Infrastructure.Tests/Tenancy/TenantRepositoryFilterTests.cs
Test Quality · No assertions: FilterAdded_AllowsUnfiltered Tests/Revo.Infrastructure.Tests/Tenancy/TenantRepositoryFilterTests.cs
Test Quality · No assertions: FilterAdded_NullContextAllowsNull Tests/Revo.Infrastructure.Tests/Tenancy/TenantRepositoryFilterTests.cs
Test Quality · No assertions: FilterAdded_NullContextAllowsAny Tests/Revo.Infrastructure.Tests/Tenancy/TenantRepositoryFilterTests.cs
Test Quality · No assertions: FilterModified_AllowsOwnAndCommon Tests/Revo.Infrastructure.Tests/Tenancy/TenantRepositoryFilterTests.cs
Test Quality · No assertions: FilterModified_AllowsUnfiltered Tests/Revo.Infrastructure.Tests/Tenancy/TenantRepositoryFilterTests.cs
Test Quality · No assertions: FilterModified_NullContextAllowsNull Tests/Revo.Infrastructure.Tests/Tenancy/TenantRepositoryFilterTests.cs
Test Quality · No assertions: FilterModified_NullContextAllowsAny Tests/Revo.Infrastructure.Tests/Tenancy/TenantRepositoryFilterTests.cs
Dependency Hygiene · Deprecated: xunit
Boundary Type-Coupling · Cross-context type IActorContext (Revo.Core → Extensions)
Boundary Type-Coupling · Cross-context type IEnvironment (Revo.Core → Revo.Infrastructure)
Boundary Type-Coupling · Cross-context type IActorContext (Revo.Core → Revo.Infrastructure)
Boundary Type-Coupling · Cross-context type IAggregateStore (Revo.Infrastructure → Providers)
Boundary Type-Coupling · Cross-context type IAggregateStore (Revo.Infrastructure → Providers)
Incompleteness & stubs · Fake-async — async method never awaits Revo.Infrastructure/DataAccess/Migrations/DatabaseMigrationSelector.cs
Incompleteness & stubs · Condition was already decided — an earlier guard makes this test constant Revo.Infrastructure/Events/Async/AsyncEventListenerBindingExtensions.cs
Incompleteness & stubs · Condition was already decided — an earlier guard makes this test constant Revo.Infrastructure/Events/Async/AsyncEventListenerBindingExtensions.cs
Incompleteness & stubs · Fake-async — async method never awaits Tools/Revo.Tools.DatabaseMigrator/DatabaseMigrator.cs

Rebuild cost: about €63,000 · Estimate

Cost to rebuild	€21,000 to €100,000, for 345 to 1,098 hours of work, about 0.4 person-years for one engineer
Difficulty of the problem	High, 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	×0.7 at a score of 48. Better code takes more work to write, so the factor is ×1.0 at a score of 70, lower below it and higher above it.
Size	Medium: 26,985 lines of product code
Comment lines	The estimate prices 26,588 lines. Comment lines count towards the size of 26,985 lines but aren't priced as work.

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.

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 Vulnerable finding(s) in Dependency Hygiene.

Raises the score by about 3 points · Low effort · Dependency Hygiene

Resolve the 7 WriteOnlyPrivateField finding(s) in Explicit Debt — start with ProjectionEventListenerTests.cs (2), EF6MigrationsModule.cs, EF6EntityEventProjectorTests.cs.

Raises the score by about 3 points · Low effort · Explicit Debt

Resolve the 1 No ADRs found finding(s) in ADR Quality.

Raises the score by about 2 points · Low effort · ADR Quality

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 €63,000 to build again, about 0.4 person-years of work. Its weakest lens is Production Readiness, at 44 (Weak). Production Readiness is about whether the product is ready to run in production and to change without breaking. Because the weakest lens counts most in the score, work on Production Readiness also moves the score most.

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

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

If you do one thing first · First action

Resolve the 1 Vulnerable finding(s) in Dependency Hygiene. Of all the actions in this report, it raises the score most for the work it takes: about 3 points for low effort, because it clears the 1 Dependency Hygiene 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 — bounded-context dependency graph

Each box is a bounded context (its layer projects grouped, or a project count when large); arrows show dependencies between contexts. A shared kernel is where many arrows converge.

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.

120 modules, with 338 dependencies between them. 6 loops run through 16 of the modules, marked above the diagonal.

The table shows the 40 modules with the most connections; 80 more are left out to keep it readable.

Which modules use which. The module on each row uses the module in each column, and the number counts the pairs of types that connect them. A cell above the diagonal is part of a loop.
uses →	1 Core.Collections	2 Core.Lifecycle	3 Core.Types	4 DataAccess.Entities	5 Core.Security	6 Domain.Entities.Basic	7 EF6.DataAccess.Model	8 Core.Configuration	9 Core.Core	10 EFCore.DataAccess.Configuration	11 Core.Events	12 EFCore.DataAccess.Entities	13 Core.Transactions	14 Domain.Events	16 Infrastructure.DataAccess.Migrations.Providers	17 Infrastructure.Events	18 Core.Commands	19 Domain.Entities	20 EF6.DataAccess.Entities	21 Domain.Entities.EventSourcing	22 Infrastructure.DataAccess.Migrations	23 Infrastructure.Jobs	25 Infrastructure.Tenancy	26 Domain.Sagas	28 Infrastructure.Events.Async	29 Infrastructure.Events.Async.Generic	30 Infrastructure.Projections	32 EFCore.Projections	33 Infrastructure.EventStores	35 Infrastructure.EventStores.Generic	36 Infrastructure.Repositories	37 EFCore.Repositories
1 Core.Collections
2 Core.Lifecycle
3 Core.Types
4 DataAccess.Entities
5 Core.Security		1	1
6 Domain.Entities.Basic				4														4
7 EF6.DataAccess.Model	2	1	2																1
8 Core.Configuration					1												1
9 Core.Core								1
10 EFCore.DataAccess.Configuration								2
11 Core.Events									1
12 EFCore.DataAccess.Entities				9						1
13 Core.Transactions											3
14 Domain.Events	1	1	1								2							1
15 Extensions.History.ChangeTracking		1	1	2					1		2
16 Infrastructure.DataAccess.Migrations.Providers											2										6
17 Infrastructure.Events			3								6
18 Core.Commands		1	2						2				6
19 Domain.Entities		1	1	1		1								3
20 EF6.DataAccess.Entities	1	1		9			4						3
21 Domain.Entities.EventSourcing														4				4
22 Infrastructure.DataAccess.Migrations		1							1						2		3
23 Infrastructure.Jobs									1								10
24 Infrastructure.Security.Commands		1			7				1								8
25 Infrastructure.Tenancy				1													4
26 Domain.Sagas	3	1	1			1					4			4			3	1		1
27 Extensions.Notifications.Channels.Buffering	2	1		4																		2
28 Infrastructure.Events.Async		1							2		11		2									2
29 Infrastructure.Events.Async.Generic				5							5					2									6				1
30 Infrastructure.Projections	1	1	1	1							10		3	7		3	1	1					1		2
31 EF6.Projections			1						1		1		1	1		1	1	1	3				1		3		10
32 EFCore.Projections			1								3	4	4	2		1	2	2					1		3		14					1
33 Infrastructure.EventStores											6															1
34 RavenDB.Projections			1						1		1		1	1		1	1	1					1		3		9
35 Infrastructure.EventStores.Generic				4							2					5									4	1			9
36 Infrastructure.Repositories				7							5		8	2		3		10		3									3
37 EFCore.Repositories				2							3	3	10			3	1	3										1	1		7
38 Infrastructure.Sagas	1	1									6		3	7			2	1						4	4						2
39 EFCore.EventStores				1								1	2			2										1			1	2		2
40 EFCore.Events				1									1												1	3			1			1

Uses a module listed above itPart of a loopThe module itself

At a glance — Code Health · 44% · Weak · gated by X4, X5 ·

The Good

D1 · .NET / C# Cyclomatic Complexity 9.0 D2 · .NET / C# Cognitive Complexity 8.0 D3 · .NET / C# God Classes 9.1 D4 · .NET / C# Code Duplication 9.5 D17 · .NET / C# Explicit Debt 7.4 D18 · .NET / C# Solution Shape 10.0 D39 · .NET / C# IL Efficiency 10.0 GD1 · Repo Unfinished & placeholder code 10.0 X1 · Repo Async correctness 7.2 X12 · Repo Unreachable branch 10.0 X13 · Repo Undrained process stream 10.0 X16 · Repo Unfloored truncation loop 10.0 X19 · Repo Unrestored process-global state 10.0 X20 · Repo Mistyped argument guard 10.0 X21 · Repo Side-effecting pattern guard 10.0 X22 · Repo Contradicted release guard 10.0 X25 · Repo Inert configuration knob 10.0 X26 · Repo Unsynchronised callback handoff 10.0 X27 · Repo Collection changed while being enumerated 10.0 X28 · Repo Index access outside its own emptiness guard 10.0 X29 · Repo Per-element action decided by a fixed element 10.0 X30 · Repo Support guard that admits what it rejects 10.0 X32 · Repo Type resolved by simple name across every loaded assembly 10.0

The Bad

IC1 · Repo Incompleteness & stubs 5.1 X18 · Repo Disposal-pattern correctness 6.4 X2 · Repo Cancellation propagation 5.3 X3 · Repo Exception handling 6.1

The Ugly

X23 · Repo Unguarded diagnostic materialisation 4.9 X4 · Repo Structured logging 3.2 X5 · Repo Nullable reference types 2.0

At a glance — Architecture · 78% · Strong ·

The Good

D5 · .NET / C# Coupling 10.0 D6 · .NET / C# Cohesion (LCOM4) 10.0 D23 · .NET / C# Boundary Type-Coupling 9.2 D26 · .NET / C# Project Cohesion 8.7 D27 · .NET / C# Navigability 7.4 D35 · .NET / C# Change Coupling 10.0 AX1 · Repo Captive dependencies 10.0 AX2 · Repo Stateful singletons 10.0 AX3 · Repo Project dependency cycles 10.0 AX5 · Repo Architecture & structure 10.0 AX6 · Repo Interface segregation 10.0 AX8 · Repo Test isolation 10.0 AX9 · Repo CQS / query purity 10.0

The Bad

AX4 · Repo Dependency direction 6.6

The Ugly

AX10 · Repo Code composition 4.9

At a glance — Maturity · 50% · Adequate · gated by M2 ·

The Good

D15 · .NET / C# Churn × Complexity Hotspots 10.0 D21 · .NET / C# Naming Consistency 10.0 D24 · .NET / C# Comment Value 9.0 D34 · .NET / C# Knowledge Freshness 10.0 M3 · Repo Folder & project structure 8.0 M4 · Repo Documentation accuracy 10.0

The Bad

D19 · .NET / C# Documentation Quality 6.0 M1 · Repo Documentation (README) 6.7

The Ugly

D20 · .NET / C# ADR Quality 0.0 M2 · Repo Architecture documentation 0.0

At a glance — Readiness · 44% · Weak · gated by P3 ·

The Good

D8 · .NET / C# Code Coverage 8.2 D9 · .NET / C# Test Distribution 10.0 D10 · .NET / C# Test Quality 9.9 D11 · .NET / C# Test Reliability 10.0 D13 · .NET / C# REDACTED Scanning 10.0 D14 · .NET / C# License Compliance 10.0 ED5 · Repo Idempotency 7.0 P1 · Repo CI/CD gates 10.0 P6 · Repo Release Hygiene 10.0 P8 · Repo Schema migrations 10.0

The Bad

P10 · Repo Library API & versioning 6.0 P2 · Repo Observability 6.7 P4 · Repo Deployment & Rollback 5.0

The Ugly

D12 · .NET / C# Dependency Hygiene 4.8 P3 · Repo Security & performance tooling 0.0 P9 · Repo Domain vs controller coverage 4.1

At a glance — Security · 67% · Adequate · gated by D28 ·

The Good

D44 · .NET / C# Platform End-of-Life 10.0 C2 · Repo Access Controls 7.0 S1 · Repo Cryptographic Hygiene 8.0 X14 · Repo Bypassable address classification 10.0 X15 · Repo Unvalidated length from an untrusted reader 10.0 X17 · Repo Uncapped recursion over a caller-supplied document 10.0 X24 · Repo Document value interpolated into markup unescaped 10.0

The Bad

D29 · .NET / C# Static Analysis (SAST) 5.0 D30 · .NET / C# Dependency Vulnerabilities 6.7

The Ugly

D28 · .NET / C# Secrets (history) 1.0

At a glance — Event Sourcing · 82% · Strong ·

The Good

ES1 · Repo Fold determinism 10.0 ES3 · Repo PII in the event store 10.0

The Bad

ES2 · Repo Immutable events 5.7

At a glance — Performance · 60% · Adequate ·

The Bad

PF3 · Repo Async & latency hygiene 6.0

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
A07:2025 — Authentication Failures	10	High / Critical
A03:2025 — Software Supply Chain Failures	6	High / Critical
A05:2025 — Injection	4	High / Critical

Roadmap

Begin by cleaning up deprecated and vulnerable dependencies, prioritizing the test projects and addressing the single vulnerability. Next, eliminate explicit technical debt by removing unused private fields and dead code, starting with the identified test and extension files. Finally, integrate a static analysis security tool into the CI pipeline to automatically block security regressions before they are merged.

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

Do this	Helps	Effort	Dimension
Resolve the 1 Vulnerable finding(s) in Dependency Hygiene.	+3.3 pts	Low	Dependency Hygiene
Resolve the 7 WriteOnlyPrivateField finding(s) in Explicit Debt — start with ProjectionEventListenerTests.cs (2), EF6MigrationsModule.cs, EF6EntityEventProjectorTests.cs.	+3.3 pts	Low	Explicit Debt
Resolve the 1 No ADRs found finding(s) in ADR Quality.	+2.2 pts	Low	ADR Quality
Resolve the 11 Deprecated finding(s) in Dependency Hygiene — start with Revo.Core.Tests.csproj, Revo.Domain.Tests.csproj, Revo.DataAccess.Tests.csproj.	+4.2 pts	Medium	Dependency Hygiene
Resolve the 2 Outdated finding(s) in Dependency Hygiene — start with Revo.Examples.Todos.Tests.csproj, REDACTED.	+1.8 pts	Low	Dependency Hygiene
Add a SAST step to CI running what this repository's stack ships: CodeQL's csharp pack, or a .NET security analyzer package — or `semgrep --config=auto`, which runs on any language — so a security regression fails the build instead of landing.	+3.0 pts	Medium	Security & performance tooling
Resolve the 1 No assertions (empty test) finding(s) in Test Quality — start with EntityAttributeChangeLoggerTests.cs.	+1.3 pts	Low	Test Quality
Record your significant design decisions. Write one short document per decision, giving its date, the situation, the decision and its consequences, and keep them together with your other design documents. A docs/adr folder with each file named by number and title is the easiest place to find them.	+2.4 pts	Medium	Architecture documentation

File quality

Per-file score 0–10 — a quality signature. Of 365 files carrying findings, judged against the Production bar: 0% slop · 25% mixed · 75% near-clean.

File	Score	Band	Worst signal
Tests/Revo.Infrastructure.Tests/Repositories/EventSourcedAggregateStoreTests.cs	4.4	Mixed	Explicit Debt: WriteOnlyPrivateField
REDACTED	4.5	Mixed	Secrets (history): High secret: REDACTED
Providers/EF6/Tests/Revo.EF6.Tests/Projections/EF6EntityEventProjectorTests.cs	4.9	Mixed	Explicit Debt: WriteOnlyPrivateField
Providers/RavenDB/Revo.RavenDB/DataAccess/RavenCrudRepository.cs	5.1	Mixed	God Classes: TooManyMethods: RavenCrudRepository
REDACTED	5.7	Mixed	Static Analysis (SAST): High: REDACTED
REDACTED	5.7	Mixed	Static Analysis (SAST): High: REDACTED
REDACTED	5.7	Mixed	Dependency Vulnerabilities: High CVE: REDACTED
REDACTED	5.8	Mixed	Secrets (history): High secret: REDACTED
REDACTED	5.8	Mixed	Static Analysis (SAST): High: REDACTED
REDACTED	5.8	Mixed	Dependency Vulnerabilities: High CVE: REDACTED
Revo.Infrastructure/DataAccess/Migrations/Providers/AdoNetStubDatabaseMigrationProvider.cs	5.9	Mixed	Cognitive Complexity: AdoNetStubDatabaseMigrationProvider.ApplyMigrationsAsync (cognitive 26)
Revo.Infrastructure/DataAccess/Migrations/DatabaseMigrationSelector.cs	6.0	Mixed	Explicit Debt: TodoComment
Providers/EF6/Revo.EF6/DataAccess/Entities/EF6CrudRepository.cs	6.0	Mixed	Explicit Debt: TodoComment
Providers/EFCore/Revo.EFCore/DataAccess/Entities/EFCoreCrudRepository.cs	6.0	Mixed	Explicit Debt: TodoComment
Revo.Core/Core/StringExtensions.cs	6.0	Mixed	Explicit Debt: Dead code: IndexOfI
Revo.Core/Collections/Extensions.cs	6.0	Mixed	Explicit Debt: Dead code: ToSeparatedString
Revo.Infrastructure/Sagas/SagaTypeConfiguration.cs	6.0	Mixed	Explicit Debt: Dead code: HandlesByKey
Revo.Infrastructure/Events/Async/AsyncEventListenerBindingExtensions.cs	6.0	Mixed	Explicit Debt: Dead code: BindAsyncEventListener
Revo.Infrastructure/DataAccess/Migrations/DatabaseMigrationNode.cs	6.0	Mixed	Explicit Debt: Dead code: AddParent
Providers/EFCore/Revo.EFCore/DataAccess/Configuration/EFCoreDataAccessConfigurationSection.cs	6.0	Mixed	Explicit Debt: Dead code: ClearConventions

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 — 36

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 — 646

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 — 132

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

Could not be resolved — 1

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

Methodology & how to trust this report

Watchdog is a deep, periodic assessment — run each sprint, monthly, or quarterly, taking the time to go wider and deeper than a quick check and surfacing in one coherent report what you'd otherwise piece together from a dozen separate tools. It scores deterministically: the same commit yields the same score, every run. 79 of 85 evaluated dimensions are computed purely by tools and static analysis (confidence 1.0); 6 documentation/naming judgement(s) are LLM-assisted and labelled advisory. Overall confidence is 1.0 — 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 — 85 dimensions across the health lenses

D1D2D3D4D5D6D8D9D10D11D12D13D14D15D17D18D19D20D21D23D24D26D27D28D29D30D34D35D39D44AX1AX10AX2AX3AX4AX5AX6AX8AX9C2ED5ES1ES2ES3GD1IC1M1M2M3M4P1P10P2P3P4P6P8P9PF3S1X1X12X13X14X15X16X17X18X19X2X20X21X22X23X24X25X26X27X28X29X3X30X32X4X5

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, 754 of 814 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	Secrets in history, SAST, CVEs, IaC & container, PII / GDPR	1.86.0 · 0.69.3	✓ 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 01a160f1-afe6-7930-b0c9-1b4d315b3b15.

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.

D16 Bus Factor — not measured this run — This is a true statement about the repository that carries nothing for its owner to act on, so it is reported here rather than as a defect in their code. Single-maintainer repository — bus factor is not applicable (5 contributor(s) across 489 commit(s) sampled, automation and bot accounts excluded). One of them holds 93% of the history; the other 4 hold 1.8% each on average, below the 5% at which there is somebody to hand the work to. That is a single maintainer with drive-by contributors, not a team whose knowledge has concentrated — so the bus factor is not applicable and there is nothing here for the owner to act on.
D22 Internal API Consistency — not measured this run — This is a true statement about the repository that carries nothing for its owner to act on, so it is reported here rather than as a defect in their code. The loaded project set declares no packable project and no `.Contracts` project, so there is no intentionally-exposed surface for API consistency to be judged over.
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. `Extensions/Revo.Extensions.AutoMapper/AutoMapperModule.cs`, `Providers/EasyNetQ/Revo.EasyNetQ/EasyNetQBus.cs` 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.
IC1 Incompleteness & stubs — measured, with a gap in what it reached — Watchdog measured this, but not all of it. What it did not reach is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — so the numbers on that dimension cover less than the repository, and the part left out is not evidence that it would have passed. 22 further occurrence(s) are not listed individually; the score already reflects all 62.
X2 Cancellation propagation — measured, with a gap in what it reached — Watchdog measured this, but not all of it. What it did not reach is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — so the numbers on that dimension cover less than the repository, and the part left out is not evidence that it would have passed. 194 further occurrence(s) are not listed individually; the score already reflects all 234.

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

Limitations & what we did not check

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

Per-dimension blind spots

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

D1 Cyclomatic Complexity: Cyclomatic complexity counts branches statically — it cannot tell an essential decision tree from accidental tangle, nor see complexity that lives in data or configuration (large switch-case token tables, DSL lexers/parsers, data-as-code rule tables) rather than control flow: a tokenizer's many single-character cases read as high complexity though each branch is trivial.
D2 Cognitive Complexity: Cognitive-complexity heuristics approximate how hard code is to follow; genuine domain difficulty and well-named intent that eases reading are not captured.
D3 God Classes: "God class" is sized by members and responsibilities visible in the type — a deliberately broad facade over a coherent subsystem can read the same as an accidental grab-bag. For front-end JS the file-length check is cohesion-aware (a single-responsibility module — one class/IIFE — earns a 3× threshold), but cohesion is approximated from top-level declarations, not true dependency structure.
D4 Code Duplication: Duplication is token-similarity — an in-process token-stream comparison over sliding windows, with type-aware normalization — so it finds copy-paste, not semantic duplication expressed differently. Committed machine-written code (scaffolded migrations, designer/codegen output, protobuf/OpenAPI stubs, model snapshots) is EXCLUDED — its repetition is the tool's, not the team's — so the score reflects hand-written duplication only.
D5 Coupling: Coupling is measured between projects/assemblies — runtime coupling through DI, reflection, messaging or shared databases is invisible to a static reference graph.
D6 Cohesion (LCOM4): LCOM4 cohesion is syntactic — it infers connectivity from which methods touch which fields/methods by name, not from real runtime behaviour or intent.
D8 Code Coverage: Coverage is measured by building and running the test suite inside Watchdog's isolated image — the target repo is never modified, and nothing on your systems runs. So coverage exists only when the suite builds and runs within the inline time budget; one that needs external services, can't build, or exceeds the budget yields no coverage (D8 then degrades to not-measured, not a low score). Line coverage also says nothing about assertion quality.
D9 Test Distribution: The test-pyramid shape is inferred from project/folder naming and references, with a single test host bucketed per-file by its path tier and content signals — a suite that names tiers unconventionally and gives no per-file signal can still be mis-bucketed.
D10 Test Quality: Assertion density is structural — it cannot tell a meaningful behavioural assertion from a trivial one, only that an assertion is present.
D11 Test Reliability: Flakiness is inferred from history/markers — Watchdog runs the suite once (for coverage), not the repeated runs under varied conditions that reveal nondeterminism, so a flaky test never recorded as failing is invisible here.
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.
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.
D18 Solution Shape: Build integrity reflects whether the solution compiled in this environment — a build that needs a private feed, a specific SDK, or a generated file absent from the repo can read as broken when it is merely unreproducible here.
D19 Documentation Quality: Documentation quality is judged by an LLM over a bounded sample of docs — it reads what is written, not whether the docs match the running system, and it is advisory, not a measurement. Its critique rows are drawn from a closed category vocabulary and each row means the same thing in every run, so two scans can be compared row by row; the SET that fires is still a sample, and does not repeat exactly. Measured on one frozen input, six scans at one engine SHA: 2-5 critique rows per scan, 8 distinct rows across the six, 3 of those 8 seen in only one scan. So a D19 row is evidence about the documentation, but a COUNT of D19 rows is not a quantity — never read a change in it as an improvement or a regression.
D20 ADR Quality: ADR quality is an LLM read of the decision records present — it cannot know about decisions made and never recorded, and its verdict is sampled and advisory.
D21 Naming Consistency: Naming quality is an LLM judgement over a bounded sample — it assesses clarity/consistency of the names it sees, not domain-correctness, and is advisory.
D23 Boundary Type-Coupling: Boundary leakage is detected from type references across detected contexts — leaks that flow through primitives, serialization or shared infrastructure may not surface as a typed reference.
D24 Comment Value: Comment value (WHY vs WHAT) is an LLM judgement over a bounded sample — it is advisory and cannot weigh a comment against the precise code change it was written to explain.
D26 Project Cohesion: Project focus is sized from members/namespaces per project — a project that is broad by deliberate design reads the same as one that has sprawled.
D27 Navigability: Indirection/navigability is structural — it measures hops to follow a call, not whether that indirection buys real flexibility or just ceremony.
D28 Secrets (history): Secret-history scanning sweeps the git log for known patterns — a secret that predates the available history, or never matched a signature, is not found (clean means "nothing matched in the history we can see").
D29 Static Analysis (SAST): SAST findings are pattern-based (semgrep) — it finds classes of bug it has rules for; logic flaws, auth/authorization gaps and issues needing runtime context are out of reach (and clean means "no rule matched").
D30 Dependency Vulnerabilities: CVE matching depends on accurate package/version metadata and 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.
D34 Knowledge Freshness: Freshness is decayed commit RECENCY, not comprehension — code read often but rarely committed reads as orphaned, and stable code that genuinely needs no changes is penalised the same as forgotten code; bot/squash commits distort it like the bus factor.
D35 Change Coupling: Change coupling is co-change in COMMITS — files split across separate commits, or coupled only through a shared config/build step, read as uncoupled, and a sweeping commit (rename/format) is excluded so it doesn't couple everything. It shows that files change together, not WHY: a high coupling can be a healthy cohesive pair as readily as a hidden leak.
D44 Platform End-of-Life: The support table is FROZEN, so it goes out of date by losing RECALL: a release that ended support after the table was written is missed until the table is refreshed, and this dimension reading 10 is not evidence that a platform is current. Only platforms the repository DECLARES in a place this pass reads are seen — a runtime named only in a Dockerfile (D31's subject), in a CI workflow (D29's), or in a file this pass does not parse (go.mod, a Gemfile ruby directive) is invisible here, which is why a repository declaring none of them abstains rather than scoring. Only frameworks with a PUBLISHED support policy are tracked: React, Flask and Express publish none, so their age cannot be judged and their absence from a report is not a statement that they are supported.
AX10 Code composition: Role is inferred from namespace/folder convention, not semantics — a domain concept living in a folder named "Services" reads as application, and the split is lines-of-code, not business value. The business-logic-share score is a SOFT, FLOORED signal: it contributes to the Architecture lens but is floored at the Critical gate, so an infrastructure-heavy design (a gateway, an ETL, a driver) is legitimately low without being nuked to zero.
AX9 CQS / query purity: Handlers are found by interface/name convention — a query handler using neither is not seen. Mutation is a resolved write/publish invocation (SaveChanges/repository/bus), so a write hidden behind a hand-rolled wrapper, reflection, or a string-keyed service locator resolves to a non-persistence type and isn't flagged; it detects that a query writes state, not whether the write is a legitimate read-side cache update. Clean means "no resolved write/publish in a query body", not a proof of CQS purity.
ED5 Idempotency: Idempotency is judged from the handler body's visible writes and guards — a guard enforced by a database unique constraint, a broker's exactly-once delivery, or a domain method whose no-op-when-applied logic the scan can't follow may read as at-risk; the at-risk candidates are confirmed by a SAMPLED LLM verdict (advisory, not exhaustive) and degrade to heuristic-only when no model is configured. It flags the at-least-once double-apply SHAPE, not a runtime proof of a duplicate effect.
M4 Documentation accuracy: Onboarding quality is an LLM read of the docs/setup present — it cannot run the onboarding or measure how long a real new joiner takes; the verdict is sampled and advisory.
P4 Deployment & Rollback: Approval/branch-protection rules live in repository settings the scan cannot see — only their in-repo evidence (config files, workflows) is checked, so a control enforced purely in the host's settings reads as "not evidenced".
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 (6): D19, D21, D24, D26, ED5, M4 (model: Local LLM). For these, a model reads a bounded sample and sets the numeric score; each names its own sample and method on its card. They are sampled and advisory by design: they vary at the margins between runs and are never a deterministic measurement. Every other score in this report is tool-computed at confidence 1.0.

Dimensions

D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity9.0 / 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 9.0 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Prevented

2 method(s) exceeded the cyclomatic complexity threshold of 15; the worst was DatabaseMigrationSelector.SelectModuleMigrationsNoDependenciesAsync at 34.

DatabaseMigrationSelector.SelectModuleMigrationsNoDependenciesAsync (cyclomatic 34)Revo.Infrastructure/DataAccess/Migrations/DatabaseMigrationSelector.cs:171

EntityEventToPocoProjector.ProjectEventsAsync (cyclomatic 16)Revo.Infrastructure/Projections/EntityEventToPocoProjector.cs:46

What to do

Bring the 2 bodies over 15 down to 15 or less in Cyclomatic Complexity — start with DatabaseMigrationSelector.SelectModuleMigrationsNoDependenciesAsync (cyclomatic 34), EntityEventToPocoProjector.ProjectEventsAsync (cyclomatic 16). — 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 2 together lifts Cyclomatic Complexity from 9.0 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 Complexity8.0 / 10Strong✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

8 method(s) exceeded the cognitive complexity threshold of 15; the worst was DatabaseMigrationSelector.SelectModuleMigrationsNoDependenciesAsync at 56.

DatabaseMigrationSelector.SelectModuleMigrationsNoDependenciesAsync (cognitive 56)Revo.Infrastructure/DataAccess/Migrations/DatabaseMigrationSelector.cs:171

DatabaseMigrationRegistry.ValidateMigrations (cognitive 31)Revo.Infrastructure/DataAccess/Migrations/DatabaseMigrationRegistry.cs:37

AdoNetStubDatabaseMigrationProvider.ApplyMigrationsAsync (cognitive 26)Revo.Infrastructure/DataAccess/Migrations/Providers/AdoNetStubDatabaseMigrationProvider.cs:70

EntityEventToPocoProjector.ProjectEventsAsync (cognitive 22)Revo.Infrastructure/Projections/EntityEventToPocoProjector.cs:46

SagaConventionConfigurationScanner.AddEvents (cognitive 21)Revo.Domain/Sagas/SagaConventionConfigurationScanner.cs:23

+ 3 more group(s) — more in Appendix A; the complete list is findings.md.

What to do

Bring the 2 bodies over 30 down to 30 or less in Cognitive Complexity — start with DatabaseMigrationSelector.SelectModuleMigrationsNoDependenciesAsync (cognitive 56), DatabaseMigrationRegistry.ValidateMigrations (cognitive 31). — 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 2 together lifts Cognitive Complexity from 8.0 to about 8.6/10, 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 Classes9.1 / 10Stronggated by 5 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 9.1 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Prevented

5 god class(es) detected.

TooManyMethods: EF6CrudRepository · ×5Providers/EF6/Revo.EF6/DataAccess/Entities/EF6CrudRepository.cs

What to do

Resolve the 5 TooManyMethods finding(s) in God Classes — start with EF6CrudRepository.cs, EFCoreCrudRepository.cs, InMemoryCrudRepository.cs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (5 warning-level).
Enforce God Classes in CI to reach Verified (currently Documented). — Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Prevented — provenance only; does not change the score.

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

D4 · Code Duplication9.5 / 10Stronggated by 31 serious findings✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

30 duplicated block group(s) detected. One further row reports members as variants of one another; it aggregates block groups already counted above and is not itself counted.

Duplicated block (5 lines × 2) · ×11Providers/EF6/Revo.EF6/DataAccess/Model/EntityTypeDiscovery.cs:60

Duplicated block (8 lines × 2) · ×3Providers/EF6/Revo.EF6/DataAccess/Entities/EF6CrudRepository.cs:218

Duplicated block (6 lines × 2) · ×3Providers/EF6/Revo.EF6/DataAccess/Entities/EF6CrudRepository.cs:324

Duplicated block (33–36 lines × 2) · ×2Providers/EF6/Revo.EF6/DataAccess/Entities/EF6CrudRepository.cs:379

Duplicated block (18 lines × 2) · ×2Revo.Infrastructure/Projections/EntityEventProjector.cs:134

+ 9 more group(s) — more in Appendix A; the complete list is findings.md.

What to do

Resolve the 11 Duplicated block (5 lines × 2) finding(s) in Code Duplication — start with EF6CrudRepository.cs (8), EntityTypeDiscovery.cs, IQueryableAggregateStore.cs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (11 warning-level).
Resolve the 3 Duplicated block (8 lines × 2) finding(s) in Code Duplication — start with EF6CrudRepository.cs, PgsqlMigrationScripter.cs, SnakeCaseColumnNamesConvention.cs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (3 warning-level).
Resolve the 3 Duplicated block (6 lines × 2) finding(s) in Code Duplication — start with EF6CrudRepository.cs, KernelBootstrapper.cs, BasicSaga.cs. — 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?

D5 · Coupling10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

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

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

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d5_recommendation.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

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

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

0 of 125 classes have LCOM4 above 3.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d6_recommendation.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

D8 · Code Coverage8.2 / 10Strong✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

Line coverage 45.1% — 258 file(s) below 50% · 28 method(s) over the CRAP-30 risk line.

Low coverage: Providers/EasyNetQ/Revo.EasyNetQ/EasyNetQBus.cs · ×258Providers/EasyNetQ/Revo.EasyNetQ/EasyNetQBus.cs:1

CRAP 90: PrivateCollectionMapping.MapPrivateCollections · ×2Providers/EF6/Revo.EF6/DataAccess/Model/PrivateCollectionMapping.cs:19

CRAP 72: PrefixConvention.PrefixColumnNames · ×2Providers/EFCore/Revo.EFCore/DataAccess/Conventions/PrefixConvention.cs:51

CRAP 56: CustomStoreConvention.ConfigureTableType · ×2Providers/EF6/Revo.EF6/DataAccess/Model/CustomStoreConvention.cs:77

No test project references Revo.RavenDBProviders/RavenDB/Revo.RavenDB/Revo.RavenDB.csproj

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

What to do

Resolve the 258 Low coverage finding(s) in Code Coverage — start with SecurityInfrastructureModule.cs (2), AuthorizationQueryableExtensions.cs (2), EntityTypeDiscovery.cs (2). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (258 warning-level).
Resolve the 2 CRAP 90 finding(s) in Code Coverage — start with PrivateCollectionMapping.cs, EFCoreCoordinatedTransaction.cs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (2 warning-level).
Resolve the 2 CRAP 72 finding(s) in Code Coverage — start with PrefixConvention.cs, PermissionTypeIndexer.cs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (2 warning-level).
Enforce Code Coverage in CI to reach Verified (currently Documented). — Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Verified — provenance only; does not change the score.

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

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

581 test methods: 581 unit, 0 integration, 0 BDD, 0 e2e.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d9_recommendation.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

D10 · Test Quality9.9 / 10Adequategated by 1 critical finding✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

0 skipped, 3 zero-assertion, 1 synchronised by a fixed sleep, 12 mock references across 581 tests.

No assertions (empty test): ChangeAttribute_StoresEntityAttributeValuesExtensions/Tests/Revo.Extensions.History.Tests/ChangeTracking/EntityAttributeChangeLoggerTests.cs:69

No assertions: ThrowsIfHeaderVersionDifferentFromFileName · ×2Tests/Revo.Infrastructure.Tests/DataAccess/Migrations/FileSqlDatabaseMigrationTests.cs:97

Fixed-sleep synchronisation: EnterIsBlockingWithTwoThreadsTests/Revo.Infrastructure.Tests/Events/Async/AsyncEventWorkerLockCacheTests.cs:21

Mock-dominated test: InitializesAll · ×10Tests/Revo.Core.Tests/Lifecycle/ApplicationConfigurerInitializerTests.cs:12

Mock framework: NSubstitute · ×12

What to do

Resolve the 1 No assertions (empty test) finding(s) in Test Quality — start with EntityAttributeChangeLoggerTests.cs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 issue-level).
Resolve the 2 No assertions finding(s) in Test Quality — start with FileSqlDatabaseMigrationTests.cs, AsyncEventWorkerLockCacheTests.cs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (2 warning-level).
Resolve the 1 Fixed-sleep synchronisation finding(s) in Test Quality — start with AsyncEventWorkerLockCacheTests.cs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).
Enforce Test Quality in CI to reach Verified (currently Documented). — Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Prevented — provenance only; does not change the score.

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

D11 · Test Reliability10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

What it measures: Whether the tests pass reliably, with no flakiness.

Method: Suite re-run N times within tiered wall-clock budgets (unit to e2e); tests failing non-deterministically across runs flagged; guarded tests retried when #if guards detected.

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

0 flaky across 2 measured tier(s). unit: measured (0 flaky); other: measured (0 flaky).

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d11_recommendation.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

D12 · Dependency Hygiene4.8 / 10Weak✓ 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 4.8 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Verified

33 outdated, 1 vulnerable, 1 deprecated packages.

Vulnerable: AutoMapper

Deprecated: xunit · ×11Tests/Revo.Core.Tests/Revo.Core.Tests.csproj:23

Outdated: coverlet.collector · ×2Examples/Todos/Revo.Examples.Todos.Tests/Revo.Examples.Todos.Tests.csproj:9

Outdated: Microsoft.Extensions.DependencyInjection · ×31

What to do

Resolve the 11 Deprecated finding(s) in Dependency Hygiene — start with Revo.Core.Tests.csproj, Revo.Domain.Tests.csproj, Revo.DataAccess.Tests.csproj. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (11 warning-level).
Resolve the 1 Vulnerable finding(s) in Dependency Hygiene. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 issue-level).
Resolve the 2 Outdated finding(s) in Dependency Hygiene — start with Revo.Examples.Todos.Tests.csproj, REDACTED. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (2 recommendation-level).
Enforce Dependency Hygiene in CI to reach Verified (currently Documented). — Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Verified — provenance only; does not change the score.

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 316 packages use a banned license. ★ DEPTH: this repository's MSBuild projects declare 48 direct `PackageReference`(s), and 202 further package(s) were reached beyond them by closing the graph over nuget.org's own nuspec dependency graph — so a banned licence pulled in only by a dependency's OWN dependencies is inside this verdict. A package whose licence nuget.org could not be asked for is not graded, and version ranges are taken at their lower bound, so this is the closure as that graph states it rather than a restored consumer's exact resolution.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d14_recommendation.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

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

No churn × complexity hotspots in the window.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d15_recommendation.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

D17 · Explicit Debt7.4 / 10Adequategated by 7 critical 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 7.4 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Prevented

53 deducted debt markers + 101 dead symbols across 26881 LoC in the .NET projects (1.3/KLoC) → score 7.4.

WriteOnlyPrivateField · ×7Providers/EF6/Revo.EF6/DataAccess/Migrations/EF6MigrationsModule.cs:10

Dead code: ToSeparatedString · ×101Revo.Core/Collections/Extensions.cs:10

TodoComment · ×39Extensions/Revo.Extensions.History/ChangeTracking/EntityAttributeChangeLogger.cs:59

CommentedOutCode · ×5Extensions/Revo.Extensions.History/ChangeTracking/EntityAttributeChangeLogger.cs:53

BareSuppressMessageProviders/EFCore/Revo.EFCore/DataAccess/Query/CustomQueryProvider.cs:6

+ 1 more group(s) — more in Appendix A; the complete list is findings.md.

What to do

Resolve the 7 WriteOnlyPrivateField finding(s) in Explicit Debt — start with ProjectionEventListenerTests.cs (2), EF6MigrationsModule.cs, EF6EntityEventProjectorTests.cs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (7 issue-level).
Resolve the 101 Dead code finding(s) in Explicit Debt — start with StringExtensions.cs (6), IModelMetadataExplorer.cs (4), MetadataExtensions.cs (3). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (101 warning-level).
Resolve the 39 TodoComment finding(s) in Explicit Debt — start with EF6CrudRepository.cs (3), EFCoreCrudRepository.cs (3), EF6DatabaseAcccess.cs (2). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (39 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?

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

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

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

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

28 projects, 940 source files, 40426 hand-written lines of code (26881 production / 13545 test — the split is derived per file: test is what its project, its own path, or a compile-guarded region marks as test, and a file carrying no test signal counts as production), 45 inter-project edges.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d18_recommendation.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

D19 · Documentation QualityAdequate◐ 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 Adequate / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

The repository's root README is a strong landing page with links to Azure DevOps build status, Codecov coverage, NuGet packages, GitBook docs, Gitter chat, PR welcome, and the license. It introduces Revo as an application framework built on event sourcing, CQRS, and DDD, then clips mid-sentence into an outline (Features; Show me how it looks!; Event; Aggregate; Command and command handler; Read model and projection; Query and query handler; 🚀 Getting started; 📦 Packages; 📑 License). The Examples/Todos/README.md is a focused directory README that documents the Examples/Todos/ subdirectory, not the repository. Coverage figures are low (Revo.Core at 14% XML coverage), but the visible content is clear and complete for its scope.

XML-doc coverage: Revo.Core · ×16REDACTED

What to do

Improve Documentation Quality — currently 6.0/10. — The repository's root README is a strong landing page with links to Azure DevOps build status, Codecov coverage, NuGet packages, GitBook docs, Gitter chat, PR welcome, and the license. It introduces Revo as an application framework built on event sourcing, CQRS, and DDD, then clips mid-sentence into an outline (Features; Show me how it looks!; Event; Aggregate; Command and command handler; Read model and projection; Query and query handler; 🚀 Getting started; 📦 Packages; 📑 License). The Examples/Todos/README.md is a focused directory README that documents the Examples/Todos/ subdirectory, not the repository. Coverage figures are low (Revo.Core at 14% XML coverage), but the visible content is clear and complete for its scope.

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

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

No architecture decision records were found.

No ADRs found

What to do

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

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

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 200 sampled symbols.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d21_recommendation.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

D23 · Boundary Type-Coupling9.2 / 10Stronggated by 11 serious findings✓ Tool-verified

What it measures: Whether domain types (IDs, enums, value objects) leak across bounded-context boundaries.

Method: Cross-context domain-type leakage via Roslyn structural classification (strongly-typed IDs / value objects) over every public surface. Exhaustive, deterministic, type-level aggregate-boundary check.

Coverage: Bounded contexts derived from NAMESPACE prefix (or graph-inferred where available); cross-boundary domain-type leakage then checked exhaustively over every public member of every type.

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 9.2 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Verified

11 domain type(s) cross context boundaries across 7 contexts.

Cross-context type EntityState (Revo → Providers) · ×9Providers/EF6/Revo.EF6/DataAccess/Entities/EF6CrudRepository.cs:331

Cross-context type IAggregateStore (Revo → Providers) · ×2Providers/EFCore/Revo.EFCore/Repositories/EFCoreCrudAggregateStoreFactory.cs:28

Providers: 1 contract type(s) expose producer-owned ids/enums

Revo: 2 contract type(s) expose producer-owned ids/enums

What to do

Resolve the 9 Cross-context type EntityState (Revo → Providers) finding(s) in Boundary Type-Coupling — start with EF6CrudRepository.cs (3), RavenCrudRepository.cs (3), EFCoreCrudRepository.cs (3). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (9 warning-level).
Resolve the 2 Cross-context type IAggregateStore (Revo → Providers) finding(s) in Boundary Type-Coupling — start with EFCoreCrudAggregateStoreFactory.cs, EFCoreEventSourcedAggregateStoreFactory.cs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (2 warning-level).
Enforce Boundary Type-Coupling in CI to reach Verified (currently Documented). — Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Verified — provenance only; does not change the score.

Detailed fixes: d23_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

D24 · Comment ValueExemplary◐ Sampled · advisory

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

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

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

32 valuable / 0 redundant across 113 sampled comments.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d24_recommendation.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

D26 · Project Cohesion8.7 / 10Strong✓ Tool-verified

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

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

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 8.7 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

2 of 28 projects flagged as possibly oversized/incoherent.

Split Revo.Infrastructure

What to do

Resolve the 1 Split Revo.Infrastructure 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?

D27 · Navigability7.4 / 10Strong✓ Tool-verified

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

Method: Call indirection (interface hops, cross-namespace calls, slice-locality scaled) over a sampled set of method invocations, size-aware baseline. Sampled; confidence discounted by symbol-resolution gaps. C# also names each pass-through layer (a class whose every public method only forwards its own parameters to one collaborator) as a located finding; the score is not affected.

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

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 7.4 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

79 % of calls cross a namespace and 26 % go through an interface, but 100 % of collaborators are co-located — so following a call takes several hops. Baseline: medium — clean/modular boundaries expected.

Pass-through layer · ×5Revo.Core/Collections/MultiValueDictionary.cs:162

What to do

Resolve the 5 Pass-through layer finding(s) in Navigability — start with MultiValueDictionary.cs, NinjectServiceLocator.cs, WrapperDbCollectionEntry{}.cs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (5 recommendation-level).

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

D28 · Secrets (history)1.0 / 10Critical✓ 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 1.0 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

9 finding(s): 0 critical, 9 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 8 High secret finding(s) in Secrets (history) — start with REDACTED (8). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (8 issue-level).
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)5.0 / 10Adequate✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 5.0 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

4 finding(s): 0 critical, 4 high, 0 medium, 0 low. semgrep hit a parse error in 3 file(s) — `Extensions/Revo.Extensions.AutoMapper/AutoMapperModule.cs` (lines 11–12, line 37), `Providers/EasyNetQ/Revo.EasyNetQ/EasyNetQBus.cs` (line 10, line 13, lines 14–15, …), `Revo.Testing/Core/FakeClock.cs` (lines 57–58, line 62) — 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. In 3 of those file(s) — `Extensions/Revo.Extensions.AutoMapper/AutoMapperModule.cs`, `Providers/EasyNetQ/Revo.EasyNetQ/EasyNetQBus.cs`, `Revo.Testing/Core/FakeClock.cs` — the break is a C# primary constructor, which semgrep's grammar cannot parse and which hides the type from every rule scoped to it; those files were re-scanned from a shadow copy with the constructor's parameter list blanked (line and column preserving), which restores the type to the rules, and 0 additional row(s) came from that pass. Only the header's own parameter list is unread in them.

REDACTED

What to do

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

D30 · Dependency Vulnerabilities6.7 / 10Adequate✓ 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 6.7 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

6 finding(s): 0 critical, 5 high, 1 medium, 0 low.

REDACTED

What to do

Resolve the 5 High CVE finding(s) in Dependency Vulnerabilities — start with REDACTED (2), REDACTED, REDACTED. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (5 issue-level).
Resolve the 1 Medium CVE finding(s) in Dependency Vulnerabilities — start with REDACTED. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

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

Every significant source file has living knowledge — recently and meaningfully worked. Counted over 106 of the 783 production source files in this repository: the rest are under the ~2,400-byte size floor this dimension measures over.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d34_recommendation.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

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

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

No strong hidden change-coupling between production files.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d35_recommendation.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

D39 · IL Efficiency10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

Method: IL instruction count per method, read from the BUILT first-party assemblies via Mono.Cecil (the target is compiled on a deep run); scored on the fraction of methods whose emitted IL body exceeds the size threshold. Sees compiler-generated bloat source can't; not-applicable when the target fails to build. Deterministic.

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

2 of 2359 first-party methods have an oversized IL body.

IL efficiency: 2 authored method(s) exceed the IL budgetRevo.Infrastructure/DataAccess/Migrations/DatabaseMigrationRegistry.cs:39

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d39_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.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 28 platform declaration(s) and 0 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.

AX1 · Captive dependencies10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

AX10 · Code composition4.9 / 10Weak✓ 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.

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.

Do you agree with this assessment?

AX2 · Stateful singletons10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

Other · Architecture — Whether singleton services avoid mutable shared instance state that concurrent callers would race on.

Method: Roslyn scan: singleton field mutations unguarded by lock or Interlocked, per type; syntax-based guard detection. Deterministic, traceable per field.

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

The namespaces Revo.Core.Commands ↔ Revo.Core.Configuration ↔ Revo.Core.Core ↔ Revo.Core.Events ↔ Revo.Core.Transactions depend on each other. The lightest dependency in the cycle is Revo.Core.Configuration → Revo.Core.Commands (Revo.Core.Configuration.CoreConfigurationSection → Revo.Core.Commands.CommandsConfiguration, 1 type pair(s)); cut that one first, e.g. by moving the shared type to a namespace both can use or inverting it behind an interface. — Revo.Core/Configuration/CoreConfigurationSection.cs:1
The namespaces Revo.Domain.Entities ↔ Revo.Domain.Entities.Basic ↔ Revo.Domain.Events depend on each other. The lightest dependency in the cycle is Revo.Domain.Entities → Revo.Domain.Entities.Basic (Revo.Domain.Entities.AggregateRoot → Revo.Domain.Entities.Basic.Entity, 1 type pair(s)); cut that one first, e.g. by moving the shared type to a namespace both can use or inverting it behind an interface. — Revo.Domain/Entities/AggregateRoot.cs:4
The namespaces Revo.EF6.DataAccess.Entities ↔ Revo.EF6.DataAccess.Model depend on each other. The lightest dependency in the cycle is Revo.EF6.DataAccess.Model → Revo.EF6.DataAccess.Entities (Revo.EF6.DataAccess.Model.ModelMetadataExplorer → Revo.EF6.DataAccess.Entities.IDbContextFactory, 1 type pair(s)); cut that one first, e.g. by moving the shared type to a namespace both can use or inverting it behind an interface. — Providers/EF6/Revo.EF6/DataAccess/Model/ModelMetadataExplorer.cs:11
The namespaces Revo.Infrastructure.DataAccess.Migrations ↔ Revo.Infrastructure.DataAccess.Migrations.Providers depend on each other. The lightest dependency in the cycle is Revo.Infrastructure.DataAccess.Migrations → Revo.Infrastructure.DataAccess.Migrations.Providers (Revo.Infrastructure.DataAccess.Migrations.DatabaseMigrationsConfiguration → Revo.Infrastructure.DataAccess.Migrations.Providers.IDatabaseMigrationScripter, 2 type pair(s)); cut that one first, e.g. by moving the shared type to a namespace both can use or inverting it behind an interface. — Revo.Infrastructure/DataAccess/Migrations/DatabaseMigrationsConfiguration.cs:2
The namespaces Revo.Infrastructure.EventStores ↔ Revo.Infrastructure.Events.Async.Generic depend on each other. The lightest dependency in the cycle is Revo.Infrastructure.EventStores → Revo.Infrastructure.Events.Async.Generic (Revo.Infrastructure.EventStores.IExternalEventStore → Revo.Infrastructure.Events.Async.Generic.ExternalEventRecord, 1 type pair(s)); cut that one first, e.g. by moving the shared type to a namespace both can use or inverting it behind an interface. — Revo.Infrastructure/EventStores/IExternalEventStore.cs:4
The namespaces Revo.EFCore.Projections ↔ Revo.EFCore.Repositories depend on each other. The lightest dependency in the cycle is Revo.EFCore.Projections → Revo.EFCore.Repositories (Revo.EFCore.Projections.EFCoreProjectionSubSystem → Revo.EFCore.Repositories.IEFCoreTransactionCoordinator, 1 type pair(s)); cut that one first, e.g. by moving the shared type to a namespace both can use or inverting it behind an interface. — Providers/EFCore/Revo.EFCore/Projections/EFCoreProjectionSubSystem.cs:8

What to do

Break namespace cycles inside a project by moving the shared type to a namespace both sides can use, or by inverting the back edge behind an interface.

Do you agree with this assessment?

AX4 · Dependency direction6.6 / 10Adequate✓ 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.

`Revo.Domain` is a Domain project but references `Revo.DataAccess`, a Infrastructure project. The clean-architecture rule is that dependencies point INWARD — the domain/application core must not depend on outer layers (infrastructure/web). Invert it: define the abstraction in the inner layer and implement it in the outer one. — Revo.Domain/Revo.Domain.csproj:18
This Domain file depends on the Infrastructure project `Revo.DataAccess`: it names `Revo.DataAccess.Entities`, `IHasId`. The inward dependency rule is broken here. It is named again on line 6. Depend on an abstraction the inner layer owns, implemented in the outer one. (×2) — Revo.Domain/Dto/EntityDto.cs:2, Revo.Domain/ReadModel/IEntityReadModel.cs:2
This Domain file depends on the Infrastructure project `Revo.DataAccess`: it names `Revo.DataAccess.Entities`, `DatabaseEntityAttribute`, `IRowVersioned`. The inward dependency rule is broken here. It is named again on lines 11, 12. Depend on an abstraction the inner layer owns, implemented in the outer one. — Revo.Domain/Entities/Basic/BasicAggregateRoot.cs:2
This Domain file depends on the Infrastructure project `Revo.DataAccess`: it names `Revo.DataAccess.Entities`, `IHasClassId`. The inward dependency rule is broken here. It is named again on line 6. Depend on an abstraction the inner layer owns, implemented in the outer one. — Revo.Domain/Entities/Basic/BasicClassAggregateRoot.cs:2
This Domain file depends on the Infrastructure project `Revo.DataAccess`: it names `Revo.DataAccess.Entities`, `IHasClassId`. The inward dependency rule is broken here. It is named again on line 10. Depend on an abstraction the inner layer owns, implemented in the outer one. — Revo.Domain/Entities/Basic/BasicClassEntity.cs:2
This Domain file depends on the Infrastructure project `Revo.DataAccess`: it names `Revo.DataAccess.Entities`, `DatabaseEntityAttribute`, `IRowVersioned`. The inward dependency rule is broken here. It is named again on lines 9, 10. Depend on an abstraction the inner layer owns, implemented in the outer one. — Revo.Domain/Entities/Basic/BasicEntity.cs:2
This Domain file depends on the Infrastructure project `Revo.DataAccess`: it names `Revo.DataAccess.Entities`, `IHasId`. The inward dependency rule is broken here. It is named again on line 9. Depend on an abstraction the inner layer owns, implemented in the outer one. — Revo.Domain/Entities/IEntity.cs:2
This Domain file depends on the Infrastructure project `Revo.DataAccess`: it names `Revo.DataAccess.Entities`, `IManuallyRowVersioned`. The inward dependency rule is broken here. It is named again on line 6. Depend on an abstraction the inner layer owns, implemented in the outer one. — Revo.Domain/ReadModel/EntityReadModel.cs:2
This Domain file depends on the Infrastructure project `Revo.DataAccess`: it names `Revo.DataAccess.Entities`, `DatabaseEntityAttribute`, `IHasId`. The inward dependency rule is broken here. It is named again on lines 6, 7. Depend on an abstraction the inner layer owns, implemented in the outer one. — Revo.Domain/ReadModel/EntityView.cs:2
This Domain file depends on the Infrastructure project `Revo.DataAccess`: it names `Revo.DataAccess.Entities`, `DatabaseEntityAttribute`. The inward dependency rule is broken here. It is named again on line 5. Depend on an abstraction the inner layer owns, implemented in the outer one. — Revo.Domain/ReadModel/ReadModelBase.cs:1

What to do

Keep dependencies pointing inward: domain/application define interfaces, infrastructure/web implement them (Dependency Inversion).

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

AX6 · Interface segregation10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

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

Method: Roslyn scan: public interface declared-member counts (accessors fold into their property/event); fat-interface threshold (over 15 declared members) flagged per type. Each finding also reports the distinct-OPERATION count — members counted by name, so an overload group counts once — which decides whether it states the caller-side ISP harm or the implementer-side burden of an overload set. TypeScript: exported interfaces that declare behaviour, counted over their REQUIRED operations (method signatures and function-typed properties with no `?`, once per signature) — data-shape interfaces and ambient .d.ts declarations are outside the population; JavaScript declares no interfaces and is not applicable. Deterministic, type-level.

`IReadRepository` declares 34 members: `DefaultFilters`, `Get`, `Get`, `GetAsync`, `GetAsync`, `GetAsync`, `GetAsync`, `FirstOrDefault`, `First`, `GetManyAsync`, `GetManyAsync`, `GetManyAsync`, `GetManyAsync`, `FirstOrDefaultAsync`, `FirstAsync`, `Find`, `Find`, `FindAsync`, `FindAsync`, `FindAsync`, `FindAsync`, `FindAll`, `FindAllAsync`, `FindAllWithAdded`, `FindManyAsync`, `FindManyAsync`, `FindManyAsync`, `FindManyAsync`, `Where`, `WhereWithAdded`, `GetEntities`, `GetEntityState`, `SetEntityState`, `IsAttached`. Counted as the author wrote them — a property is ONE member and its get/set accessors are not counted separately, and an event counts once. Those 34 declarations carry 20 distinct name(s), so part of the width is overloading rather than separate responsibilities — but 20 operations clears the >15 bar on its own, so the row is about responsibilities, not signatures. A wide interface forces every implementer and caller to depend on methods they don't use (the Interface-Segregation 'I' in SOLID). Split it into focused role-interfaces. — Revo.DataAccess/Entities/IReadRepository.cs:10

What to do

Split fat interfaces into focused role-interfaces so clients depend only on what they use.

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

C2 · Access Controls7.0 / 10Strong✓ Tool-verified

Other · Security — Whether access is authorized by default — a framework authorization attribute/decorator or policy, or imperative guard methods (throw-on-violation) called from handlers.

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

Authorization IS enforced here (by imperative guard methods that throw on violation) — this is NOT a claim that the code is unprotected. What's missing is a NAMED rule set: the guards encode the access rules inline, so the rules can't be listed, reviewed or tested apart from the call sites that apply them. Recommendation, not a defect.

What to do

Name the access rules — give each one a named predicate/policy object your guards consult, so the rule set can be reviewed and unit-tested independently of the call sites that enforce it.

Do you agree with this assessment?

ED5 · Idempotency7.0 / 10Strong◐ Sampled · advisory

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

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

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

`Handlers.TodoListCommandHandler.HandleAsync` mutates persistent state (a repository write) with no idempotency guard, and the model confirms a re-run would double-apply it. A retry or at-least-once redelivery means it can run twice — add an exists/dedup check, an upsert, an idempotency-key/inbox, or a versioned write. — Examples/Todos/Revo.Examples.Todos/Handlers/TodoListCommandHandler.cs:30
`EasyNetQ.EasyNetQBlockingSubscriptionHandler.HandleMessage` mutates persistent state (an event publish) with no idempotency guard, and the model confirms a re-run would double-apply it. A retry or at-least-once redelivery means it can run twice — add an exists/dedup check, an upsert, an idempotency-key/inbox, or a versioned write. — Providers/EasyNetQ/Revo.EasyNetQ/EasyNetQBlockingSubscriptionHandler.cs:16
`EasyNetQ.EasyNetQSubscriptionHandler.HandleMessageAsync` mutates persistent state (an event publish) with no idempotency guard, and the model confirms a re-run would double-apply it. A retry or at-least-once redelivery means it can run twice — add an exists/dedup check, an upsert, an idempotency-key/inbox, or a versioned write. — Providers/EasyNetQ/Revo.EasyNetQ/EasyNetQSubscriptionHandler.cs:16

What to do

Make retry-prone mutations idempotent — guard each write with an exists/dedup check, an upsert, an idempotency-key/inbox, or a versioned write, so a re-run doesn't double-apply.

Do you agree with this assessment?

ES1 · Fold determinism10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

Other · Event Sourcing — Whether Apply/When folds reconstruct state purely from the event (no DateTime.Now, Guid.NewGuid, Random or IO) so replay is reproducible.

Method: Roslyn syntax scan (event-sourcing gated): Apply/When folds checked for forbidden tokens (DateTime.Now, Guid.NewGuid, Random, IO), stripped of comments/strings. Deterministic, hard fact per fold.

Do you agree with this assessment?

ES2 · Immutable events5.7 / 10Adequate✓ Tool-verified

Other · Event Sourcing — Whether persisted events are immutable facts (init-only/readonly) — a settable event member lets stored history be rewritten.

Method: Roslyn scan (event-sourcing gated): persisted events checked for public setters; immutability verified per property/field. Deterministic, hard fact.

This persisted event exposes settable member(s) (AggregateId) — an event is an immutable historical fact. A public setter lets stored history be rewritten after the fact. Use `{ get; init; }` (records) or readonly fields. — Revo.Domain/Events/DomainAggregateEvent.cs:5

What to do

Make every event type immutable: records with init-only properties, or classes with readonly fields set only in the constructor.

Do you agree with this assessment?

ES3 · PII in the event store10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

Other · Event Sourcing — Whether the append-only event log avoids un-erasable personal data (or has a crypto-shredding strategy) — a GDPR right-to-erasure risk.

Method: Roslyn (event-sourcing gated): high-confidence PII flagged Warning; ambiguous name-like fields adjudicated by language model as person versus fictional. Advisory without model, definitive with.

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

A shipped member still throws NotImplementedException — generated scaffolding that was never completed. Implement it or remove the dead surface. (×37) — Revo.Testing/Infrastructure/Repositories/FakeRepository.cs:29, Revo.DataAccess/InMemory/InMemoryCrudRepository.cs:22, Revo.DataAccess/InMemory/InMemoryCrudRepository.cs:32, …

What to do

Finish or delete NotImplementedException stubs and replace placeholder literals before shipping.

Do you agree with this assessment?

IC1 · Incompleteness & stubs5.1 / 10Adequate✓ Tool-verified

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

Method: Roslyn syntax scan: incompleteness by code shape (constant-returning methods, async-never-await, #if false branches, guards that return what the code already falls through to, tests an earlier guard already decided, comparisons against NaN, skeleton types), not keyword-gated. Deterministic, code-shape heuristic.

`DatabaseAccess` is a shipped property whose accessors only throw NotImplementedException — scaffolding that was never completed. Implement it or remove the dead surface. — Providers/EF6/Revo.EF6/DataAccess/InMemory/EF6InMemoryCrudRepository.cs:16
`ReloadAsync` looks like it should compute a result but its body just returns a constant — a placeholder return that was never filled in. — Providers/EF6/Revo.EF6/DataAccess/InMemory/InMemoryDbEntityEntry.cs:67
`ConfigureProperty` takes parameters but its body is empty — it accepts inputs and does nothing. Either implement it or remove it. — Providers/EF6/Revo.EF6/DataAccess/Model/CustomStoreConvention.cs:73
`FromSqlInterpolated` is a shipped member whose whole body throws NotImplementedException — scaffolding that was never completed. Implement it or remove the dead surface. (×2) — Providers/EFCore/Revo.EFCore/DataAccess/InMemory/EFCoreInMemoryCrudRepository.cs:12, Providers/EFCore/Revo.EFCore/DataAccess/InMemory/EFCoreInMemoryDatabaseAccess.cs:21
`FromSqlRaw` is a shipped member whose whole body throws NotImplementedException — scaffolding that was never completed. Implement it or remove the dead surface. (×2) — Providers/EFCore/Revo.EFCore/DataAccess/InMemory/EFCoreInMemoryCrudRepository.cs:17, Providers/EFCore/Revo.EFCore/DataAccess/InMemory/EFCoreInMemoryDatabaseAccess.cs:26
`EFCoreInMemoryDatabaseAccess` has 4 unfinished members out of 7 declared members (methods, properties, indexers and events, whether or not each carries a body) — a scaffolded type that was never implemented. — Providers/EFCore/Revo.EFCore/DataAccess/InMemory/EFCoreInMemoryDatabaseAccess.cs:9
`GetDbContext` is a shipped member whose whole body throws NotImplementedException — scaffolding that was never completed. Implement it or remove the dead surface. (×2) — Providers/EFCore/Revo.EFCore/DataAccess/InMemory/EFCoreInMemoryDatabaseAccess.cs:31, Providers/EFCore/Revo.EFCore/DataAccess/InMemory/EFCoreInMemoryDatabaseAccess.cs:36
`Get` is a shipped member whose whole body throws NotImplementedException — scaffolding that was never completed. Implement it or remove the dead surface. (×3) — Providers/RavenDB/Revo.RavenDB/DataAccess/RavenCrudRepository.cs:30, Providers/RavenDB/Revo.RavenDB/DataAccess/RavenCrudRepository.cs:35, Revo.DataAccess/InMemory/InMemoryCrudRepository.cs:22
`GetAsync` is a shipped member whose whole body throws NotImplementedException — scaffolding that was never completed. Implement it or remove the dead surface. (×4) — Providers/RavenDB/Revo.RavenDB/DataAccess/RavenCrudRepository.cs:40, Providers/RavenDB/Revo.RavenDB/DataAccess/RavenCrudRepository.cs:45, Revo.DataAccess/InMemory/InMemoryCrudRepository.cs:32, …
`FirstOrDefault` is a shipped member whose whole body throws NotImplementedException — scaffolding that was never completed. Implement it or remove the dead surface. — Providers/RavenDB/Revo.RavenDB/DataAccess/RavenCrudRepository.cs:90
`First` is a shipped member whose whole body throws NotImplementedException — scaffolding that was never completed. Implement it or remove the dead surface. — Providers/RavenDB/Revo.RavenDB/DataAccess/RavenCrudRepository.cs:95
`Find` is a shipped member whose whole body throws NotImplementedException — scaffolding that was never completed. Implement it or remove the dead surface. (×3) — Providers/RavenDB/Revo.RavenDB/DataAccess/RavenCrudRepository.cs:110, Providers/RavenDB/Revo.RavenDB/DataAccess/RavenCrudRepository.cs:115, Revo.DataAccess/InMemory/InMemoryCrudRepository.cs:97
`FindAsync` is a shipped member whose whole body throws NotImplementedException — scaffolding that was never completed. Implement it or remove the dead surface. (×4) — Providers/RavenDB/Revo.RavenDB/DataAccess/RavenCrudRepository.cs:120, Providers/RavenDB/Revo.RavenDB/DataAccess/RavenCrudRepository.cs:125, Revo.DataAccess/InMemory/InMemoryCrudRepository.cs:110, …
`FindAllWithAdded` is a shipped member whose whole body throws NotImplementedException — scaffolding that was never completed. Implement it or remove the dead surface. — Providers/RavenDB/Revo.RavenDB/DataAccess/RavenCrudRepository.cs:151
`WhereWithAdded` is a shipped member whose whole body throws NotImplementedException — scaffolding that was never completed. Implement it or remove the dead surface. — Providers/RavenDB/Revo.RavenDB/DataAccess/RavenCrudRepository.cs:181
`GetEntities` is a shipped member whose whole body throws NotImplementedException — scaffolding that was never completed. Implement it or remove the dead surface. — Providers/RavenDB/Revo.RavenDB/DataAccess/RavenCrudRepository.cs:186
`GetEntityState` is a shipped member whose whole body throws NotImplementedException — scaffolding that was never completed. Implement it or remove the dead surface. — Providers/RavenDB/Revo.RavenDB/DataAccess/RavenCrudRepository.cs:191
`SetEntityState` is a shipped member whose whole body throws NotImplementedException — scaffolding that was never completed. Implement it or remove the dead surface. — Providers/RavenDB/Revo.RavenDB/DataAccess/RavenCrudRepository.cs:196
`IsAttached` is a shipped member whose whole body throws NotImplementedException — scaffolding that was never completed. Implement it or remove the dead surface. — Providers/RavenDB/Revo.RavenDB/DataAccess/RavenCrudRepository.cs:201
`Attach` is a shipped member whose whole body throws NotImplementedException — scaffolding that was never completed. Implement it or remove the dead surface. — Providers/RavenDB/Revo.RavenDB/DataAccess/RavenCrudRepository.cs:206
`AttachRange` is a shipped member whose whole body throws NotImplementedException — scaffolding that was never completed. Implement it or remove the dead surface. — Providers/RavenDB/Revo.RavenDB/DataAccess/RavenCrudRepository.cs:211
`AddRange` is a shipped member whose whole body throws NotImplementedException — scaffolding that was never completed. Implement it or remove the dead surface. — Providers/RavenDB/Revo.RavenDB/DataAccess/RavenCrudRepository.cs:221
`SaveChanges` is a shipped member whose whole body throws NotImplementedException — scaffolding that was never completed. Implement it or remove the dead surface. — Providers/RavenDB/Revo.RavenDB/DataAccess/RavenCrudRepository.cs:303
`GetAsync` is declared `async` but never awaits anything, so it runs synchronously while pretending to be asynchronous. Drop `async` or do the real async work. — Revo.DataAccess/InMemory/InMemoryCrudRepository.cs:42
`IncludeFilters` is a shipped member whose whole body throws NotImplementedException — scaffolding that was never completed. Implement it or remove the dead surface. — Revo.DataAccess/InMemory/InMemoryCrudRepository.cs:217
`ExcludeFilter` is a shipped member whose whole body throws NotImplementedException — scaffolding that was never completed. Implement it or remove the dead surface. — Revo.DataAccess/InMemory/InMemoryCrudRepository.cs:222
`ExcludeFilters` is a shipped member whose whole body throws NotImplementedException — scaffolding that was never completed. Implement it or remove the dead surface. — Revo.DataAccess/InMemory/InMemoryCrudRepository.cs:227

What to do

Finish or delete the unfinished stubs (NotImplementedException / empty / constant-returning bodies) — they are dead surface that looks live.
Clear the softer debt: remove commented-out code and dead branches, re-enable or delete skipped tests, and replace blanket warning suppressions with targeted ones.

Do you agree with this assessment?

M1 · Documentation (README)6.7 / 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.

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 28 of 28 project(s) that lack one — worth up to 2 pts.

Do you agree with this assessment?

M2 · Architecture documentation0.0 / 10Critical✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

What to do

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

M3 · Folder & project structure8.0 / 10Strong✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

What to do

Group production code under src/ (or split deliberately, e.g. backend/ + frontend/) so production and tooling code aren't mixed at the root.

Do you agree with this assessment?

M4 · Documentation accuracy10.0 / 10Exemplary◐ Sampled · advisory

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

What to do

Make types internal by default and expose only the deliberate public API — even for a small library, every public type is a stability contract.

Do you agree with this assessment?

P2 · Observability6.7 / 10Adequate✓ Tool-verified

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

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

What to do

Consider OpenTelemetry tracing/metrics and a health-check endpoint for operability.

Do you agree with this assessment?

P3 · Security & performance tooling0.0 / 10Critical✓ Tool-verified

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

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

No static application security testing detected. For this repository's stack, add CodeQL's csharp pack, or a .NET security analyzer package (or `semgrep --config=auto`, which runs on any language) as a CI step. What was searched, so you can tell an absence from a miss: the 1047 CI workflow file(s) in this repository, and the scanner and linter configuration checked in beside them. A scan that runs outside CI, one configured in your forge's web UI rather than in a committed file, or a tool whose name is none of those this check carries, is not seen — if that is your case the row is wrong, and saying so is more useful than adding a second scanner.

What to do

Add a SAST step to CI running what this repository's stack ships: CodeQL's csharp pack, or a .NET security analyzer package — or `semgrep --config=auto`, which runs on any language — so a security regression fails the build instead of landing.
Enable Dependabot/Renovate or a dependency-review gate.
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.

What to do

Add an approval/environment gate (required reviewers / protection rules) before production promotion.

Do you agree with this assessment?

P6 · Release Hygiene10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

P8 · Schema migrations10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

P9 · Domain vs controller coverage4.1 / 10Weak✓ Tool-verified

Readiness · Readiness — Whether test coverage concentrates on the domain (business rules) rather than the trivial web/controller layer — a focus check a generic tool can't make.

Method: Roslyn plus test-execution analysis: domain-layer versus trivial web/controller coverage ratio. Computed metric, deterministic.

Domain coverage is 34%, against a bar of 50% for this row — the layer carrying the business rules is the least covered part of the codebase that matters most. Measured over the types this analyzer classifies as domain (aggregates, value objects, domain services), so code the classifier does not place in the domain is neither counted for nor against this figure.

What to do

Raise unit-test coverage of the domain (aggregates, value objects, domain services) — that's where correctness matters most.

Do you agree with this assessment?

PF3 · Async & latency hygiene6.0 / 10Adequate✓ Tool-verified

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

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

10 blocking call(s) on async work (.Wait()/.GetAwaiter().GetResult()) — these waste a thread and can deadlock wherever a synchronization context is in play (a UI thread, or a caller that has one).
`.Wait()` blocks this thread until the async work completes — it wastes a thread-pool thread for as long as the work runs and can deadlock wherever a synchronization context is in play (a UI thread, or a caller that has one). (×4) — Extensions/Revo.Extensions.Notifications/Channels/Buffering/BufferedNotificationStartup.cs:20, Revo.Infrastructure/DataAccess/Migrations/DatabaseMigrationExecutionHook.cs:29, Revo.Infrastructure/Jobs/InMemory/InMemoryJobSchedulerProcess.cs:30, …
`.GetAwaiter().GetResult()` blocks this thread until the async work completes — it wastes a thread-pool thread for as long as the work runs and can deadlock wherever a synchronization context is in play (a UI thread, or a caller that has one). (×5) — Revo.Infrastructure/DataAccess/DatabaseInitializerLoader.cs:72, Revo.Infrastructure/Events/Async/AsyncEventExecutionCatchUp.cs:38, Providers/EasyNetQ/Revo.EasyNetQ/BusInitializer.cs:42, …
`throttle.Wait()` blocks this thread until the async work completes — it wastes a thread-pool thread for as long as the work runs and can deadlock wherever a synchronization context is in play (a UI thread, or a caller that has one). — Revo.Infrastructure/Jobs/InMemory/InMemoryJobWorkerProcess.cs:69

What to do

Make the call chain async end-to-end and await it — never block on a Task with .Wait()/.GetAwaiter().GetResult().

Do you agree with this assessment?

S1 · Cryptographic Hygiene8.0 / 10Strong✓ Tool-verified

Other · Security — Cryptographic hygiene (weak hash/cipher, password key-derivation). This codebase has no web surface, so transport/header/cookie/CSRF controls are N/A and only crypto is scored.

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

MD5/SHA1 is constructed here, and both are collision-broken. If this digest protects anything — a signature, an integrity or tamper check, a credential, or any value an attacker can influence — that is a real weakness: use SHA-256+ for content integrity, or a KDF (PBKDF2/Argon2/BCrypt) for password storage. If it only derives a non-security identifier (a cache key, a file or mutex name), collision resistance carries no security consequence here; make that intent explicit instead — a non-cryptographic hash such as `System.IO.Hashing.XxHash64`/`Crc32` says it in code — since the algorithm alone cannot distinguish the two uses. — Revo.Infrastructure/DataAccess/Migrations/SqlDatabaseMigration.cs:25

What to do

Review each MD5/SHA1 use by what it protects: replace it with SHA-256+ (or a KDF for passwords) where the digest is security-relevant, and switch it to a non-cryptographic hash (`System.IO.Hashing.XxHash64`/`Crc32`) where it only derives an identifier such as a cache key or a mutex name.

Do you agree with this assessment?

X1 · Async correctness7.2 / 10Strong✓ Tool-verified

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

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

Reading `.Result` of a task that has not completed blocks this thread until it does — the same block as `.Wait()`: under a synchronization context (Blazor, a UI thread, classic ASP.NET) it deadlocks, and on the thread pool it parks a thread for as long as the work runs. `await` the task instead (make the caller `async`); where a synchronous entry point must stay, keep the block in ONE documented bridge with a timeout. — Revo.Core/Commands/Lambda/LambdaCommandHandler.cs:42
Blocking on a Task with `.Wait()`/`.GetAwaiter().GetResult()` can deadlock (and wastes a thread). Prefer awaiting it: make the caller `async` and `await` instead. Where a synchronous entry point must stay — a public sync API you cannot break, or a process entry point that must not return until the work finishes — the block belongs in ONE documented bridge and never inside code that is already async; and where it already is that bridge, give the wait a TIMEOUT so a hung task fails the call instead of hanging the process. (×6) — Extensions/Revo.Extensions.Notifications/Channels/Buffering/BufferedNotificationStartup.cs:20, Revo.Infrastructure/DataAccess/Migrations/DatabaseMigrationExecutionHook.cs:28, Revo.Infrastructure/Events/Async/AsyncEventExecutionCatchUp.cs:38, …
This blocks on a Task **while holding a `lock`**, which is worse than an ordinary sync-over-async in two ways. `await` is illegal inside a `lock` body, so the usual fix — make the caller `async` and await it — cannot be applied where this block stands. And the thread parks while still holding the lock, so it occupies the critical section doing no work: every other caller serialises behind an operation that is only waiting, and if the awaited task itself needs a thread the pool has run out of, they wait forever. Do the async work OUTSIDE the critical section: take the lock only to read the shared state, release it, await the call, then re-take the lock to publish the result — re-checking on re-entry whether another caller won the race and, if so, discarding your result rather than overwriting theirs. Where the critical section genuinely has to span the async call, `lock` is the wrong primitive: use an async-aware one (`SemaphoreSlim` with `await WaitAsync()`) so waiters yield their thread instead of parking it. — Revo.Infrastructure/DataAccess/DatabaseInitializerLoader.cs:55
`Task.WaitAll` blocks this thread until the tasks complete — sync-over-async: it can deadlock under a synchronization context and it parks a thread for as long as the work runs. `await Task.WhenAll(…)` instead. — Revo.Infrastructure/Jobs/InMemory/InMemoryJobWorkerProcess.cs:94

What to do

Sync-over-async (deadlock risk) through `.Result`

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

X18 · Disposal-pattern correctness6.4 / 10Adequate✓ Tool-verified

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.

`enumerator` is never created by `Enumerator` — every assignment to it takes a constructor parameter — yet this type disposes it here (line 190). Its declared type `IEnumerator` is an interface, so the instance came from whoever resolved it, and that owner decides when it ends. Disposing it from here reaches outside this object's lifetime: a dependency shared with the rest of the process is torn down when THIS instance goes away, and the real owner's later `Dispose()` runs a second time on an object already disposed. Drop the call — a type disposes what it constructed, and only that. If this dependency genuinely is exclusive to this instance, construct it here (or take an owned factory) so the ownership is stated in the code rather than assumed. — Revo.Core/Collections/MultiValueDictionary.cs:190
`DbConnection` is never created by `AdoNetDatabaseMigrationProvider` — every assignment to it takes a constructor parameter — yet this type disposes it here (line 28). Its declared type `IDbConnection` is an interface, so the instance came from whoever resolved it, and that owner decides when it ends. Disposing it from here reaches outside this object's lifetime: a dependency shared with the rest of the process is torn down when THIS instance goes away, and the real owner's later `Dispose()` runs a second time on an object already disposed. Drop the call — a type disposes what it constructed, and only that. If this dependency genuinely is exclusive to this instance, construct it here (or take an owned factory) so the ownership is stated in the code rather than assumed. — Revo.Infrastructure/DataAccess/Migrations/Providers/AdoNetDatabaseMigrationProvider.cs:28
`inner` is never created by `LocalDbAsyncEnumerator` — every assignment to it takes a constructor parameter — yet this type disposes it here (line 19). Its declared type `IEnumerator` is an interface, so the instance came from whoever resolved it, and that owner decides when it ends. Disposing it from here reaches outside this object's lifetime: a dependency shared with the rest of the process is torn down when THIS instance goes away, and the real owner's later `Dispose()` runs a second time on an object already disposed. Drop the call — a type disposes what it constructed, and only that. If this dependency genuinely is exclusive to this instance, construct it here (or take an owned factory) so the ownership is stated in the code rather than assumed. — Providers/EF6/Revo.EF6/DataAccess/InMemory/LocalDbAsyncEnumerator.cs:19
`migrator` is a `DatabaseMigrator`, which implements `IDisposable`, and it is created here (line 36). Every use of it in `Upgrade` reads a member through it — it is never returned, never stored, never handed to anything else, and never disposed — so this method both creates the value and is the last thing that can release it, and does not. Nothing announces the leak: the object holds its resource until finalization if its type has a finalizer, and until the process ends if it does not, so the cost accumulates once per CALL rather than showing up as a failure. Declare it with `using` (`using var migrator = …;`), which releases it at the end of the scope on every path including a throw. — Tools/Revo.Tools.DatabaseMigrator/Program.cs:36
`migrator` is a `DatabaseMigrator`, which implements `IDisposable`, and it is created here (line 46). Every use of it in `Preview` reads a member through it — it is never returned, never stored, never handed to anything else, and never disposed — so this method both creates the value and is the last thing that can release it, and does not. Nothing announces the leak: the object holds its resource until finalization if its type has a finalizer, and until the process ends if it does not, so the cost accumulates once per CALL rather than showing up as a failure. Declare it with `using` (`using var migrator = …;`), which releases it at the end of the scope on every path including a throw. — Tools/Revo.Tools.DatabaseMigrator/Program.cs:46

What to do

Each finding names the value and the span that decides who owns it — the `new` that created it, or the constructor parameter that handed it over. Confirm ownership from that span, then make the disposal match it: release what this type created, leave what it was injected with to whoever created THAT, and drop a finalizer whose type holds nothing unmanaged to release.

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?

X2 · Cancellation propagation5.3 / 10Adequate✓ Tool-verified

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

Method: Roslyn scan: every async method (excluding framework-fixed overrides/Blazor handlers) checked for CancellationToken parameter presence. Deterministic, adoption percentage. 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 question: every named async function that itself makes a request an AbortSignal can cancel (global `fetch`, axios and its file-local instances, ky, ofetch) counts, and it is compliant when its parameters or body name a signal or it hands one of its own parameters to the request as options; signatures a framework fixes (JSX event handlers, route and lifecycle exports, request-first handlers, `override`, `'use server'` modules, TanStack `mutationFn`) are exempt unless they take a signal. Deterministic, adoption percentage.

Only 68/297 async methods accept a CancellationToken, so in-flight work can't be stopped early when the caller gives up — whatever ends it in your host (shutdown signal, timeout, abandoned request, user cancel). Thread a token through the call chain and honour it at each await and loop; where a method genuinely cannot be interrupted, omitting it is a deliberate choice — judge against your hosting model.
No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started. (×39) — Revo.Core/Commands/FilterCommandBusMiddleware.cs:43, Revo.Core/Commands/FilterCommandBusMiddleware.cs:52, Revo.Core/Commands/FilterCommandBusMiddleware.cs:61, …

What to do

Thread a CancellationToken through async methods so work stops promptly on cancellation.

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

Other · Code Health — Whether an argument guard throws the exception its own condition describes — a guard that rejects a value for being EMPTY and reports it as `ArgumentNullException` tells the caller a parameter was null when it provably was not.

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

X23 · Unguarded diagnostic materialisation4.9 / 10Weak✓ Tool-verified

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

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

`LogDebug` at line 49 is called with an argument built by `string.Join(", ", commandHandlerTypes.Select(x => x.FullName))` (line 49), whose cost grows with the collection it walks. C# evaluates a call's arguments BEFORE entering the method, so that join/projection runs in full every time this line is reached — and then the level check inside the logger discards the string it produced, because LogDebug is a level a shipped configuration normally leaves off. Nothing here decides beforehand whether the message is wanted: no `IsEnabled` test, no debug flag, no conditional-compilation region. — Revo.Core/Commands/CommandHandlerDiscovery.cs:49
`LogDebug` at line 37 is called with an argument built by `string.Join(", ", upgradeTypes.Select(x => x.FullName))` (line 37), whose cost grows with the collection it walks. C# evaluates a call's arguments BEFORE entering the method, so that join/projection runs in full every time this line is reached — and then the level check inside the logger discards the string it produced, because LogDebug is a level a shipped configuration normally leaves off. Nothing here decides beforehand whether the message is wanted: no `IsEnabled` test, no debug flag, no conditional-compilation region. — Revo.Infrastructure/Events/Upgrades/EventUpgradeDiscovery.cs:37
`LogDebug` at line 46 is called with an argument built by `string.Join(", ", projectorTypes.Select(x => x.FullName))` (line 46), whose cost grows with the collection it walks. C# evaluates a call's arguments BEFORE entering the method, so that join/projection runs in full every time this line is reached — and then the level check inside the logger discards the string it produced, because LogDebug is a level a shipped configuration normally leaves off. Nothing here decides beforehand whether the message is wanted: no `IsEnabled` test, no debug flag, no conditional-compilation region. — Revo.Infrastructure/Projections/ProjectorDiscovery.cs:46
`LogDebug` at line 32 is called with an argument built by `string.Join(", ", modelDefinitions.Select(x => x.GetType().FullName))` (line 32), whose cost grows with the collection it walks. C# evaluates a call's arguments BEFORE entering the method, so that join/projection runs in full every time this line is reached — and then the level check inside the logger discards the string it produced, because LogDebug is a level a shipped configuration normally leaves off. Nothing here decides beforehand whether the message is wanted: no `IsEnabled` test, no debug flag, no conditional-compilation region. (×2) — Providers/EF6/Revo.EF6/DataAccess/Model/ModelDefinitionDiscovery.cs:32, Providers/EFCore/Revo.EFCore/DataAccess/Model/ModelDefinitionDiscovery.cs:32

What to do

Each finding names the diagnostic call and the expression inside its argument whose cost scales with a collection. Confirm from the two that the argument is built before the call — that is C#'s evaluation order, not a guess — then put the construction behind the same level check the sink applies: `if (logger.IsEnabled(LogLevel.Trace))` for Microsoft.Extensions.Logging, the repository's own debug flag where it has one, or a message template whose ARGUMENTS the logging framework only formats when the level is on. Moving the call is not the fix: it is the join/projection in the argument that is paid, wherever the call sits.

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

Other · Code Health — Whether a `foreach` leaves the collection it is walking alone — a body that adds to or removes from the very collection the loop is enumerating invalidates the enumerator it is holding, so the next `MoveNext` throws `InvalidOperationException` and the remaining items are never seen.

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

`catch (InvalidOperationException)` does nothing with the exception it caught — the body neither logs it, rethrows it, nor even names it, so the failure is discarded as completely as by an empty catch. Log it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems, or let it propagate; if one specific failure genuinely cannot matter, catch exactly that exception type and say why in a comment on the catch. (×2) — Revo.Infrastructure/Jobs/InMemory/InMemoryJobSchedulerProcess.cs:62, Revo.Infrastructure/Jobs/InMemory/InMemoryJobWorkerProcess.cs:64

What to do

Swallowed exception (caught, then discarded)

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

X32 · Type resolved by simple name across every loaded assembly10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

Other · Code Health — Whether a plugin lookup names the type it means — searching every assembly loaded into the process for a candidate whose SIMPLE name equals a string supplied at runtime, and taking the first one found, is decided by assembly LOAD ORDER rather than by this source, so the same name can resolve to a different type on the next run.

Method: Roslyn syntax only, no semantic model: every invocation of `First`/`FirstOrDefault`/`Single`/`SingleOrDefault` whose OWN expression subtree contains both a `GetAssemblies()` call and a `GetTypes()`/`GetExportedTypes()` call — a single-element pick out of every type loaded into the process. A nested selector in the same chain sees no `GetAssemblies()` in its own subtree and is outside the population, so one lookup counts once however many links its chain has. A finding additionally needs both remaining halves: the selector must be `First`/`FirstOrDefault` (`Single`/`SingleOrDefault` reports the ambiguity rather than resolving it, and is counted and never reported), and the chain must carry an `==` comparison of `<lambda parameter>.Name` against something that is not a literal. The receiver must be a plain identifier bound by one of the chain’s own lambdas, which places `assembly.GetName().Name == "X"` outside the rule by construction. One exemption: a `.Name` test joined by `&&` to a `FullName`/`AssemblyQualifiedName` test on the same identifier is spared; joined by `||` it is not. Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.

Do you agree with this assessment?

X4 · Structured logging3.2 / 10Weak✓ Tool-verified

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

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

Logging an interpolated string (`$"..."`) collapses the event to plain text — you lose the named, queryable properties structured logging exists for. Use a message template with placeholders: `LogInformation("User {UserId} did {Action}", id, action)`. If these calls go through a logging wrapper that only accepts a pre-formatted string, give the wrapper a template+args overload that forwards to the underlying logger, then migrate call sites to it. (×30) — Revo.Core/Commands/CommandHandlerDiscovery.cs:49, Revo.Core/Commands/CommandRouter.cs:31, Revo.Core/Commands/CommandRouter.cs:67, …

What to do

Interpolated log message defeats structured logging

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

This method contradicts itself about `aggregate`: line 171 tests it for null before doing anything with it — the author's own statement that null is an input this code expects — but that `if` scopes only the block beneath it, and line 186 then dereferences `aggregate` as `aggregate.IsDeleted` AFTER the block has closed, where the guard no longer applies. A null `aggregate` skips the guarded body and reaches that line anyway, throwing NullReferenceException on exactly the input the guard was written for. If the dereference belongs to the guarded work, move it inside the block; if `aggregate` truly cannot be null by then, the guard above is misleading and should go. — Revo.Infrastructure/Repositories/EventSourcedAggregateStore.cs:186
0/17 NRT-eligible project(s) enable <Nullable>enable</Nullable> (projects targeting a pre-C#-8 framework are excluded — NRTs aren't available there). NRTs catch a whole class of null-deref bugs at compile time.

What to do

Where a method null-tests a symbol and then uses it after the guarded block closes, move the trailing work inside the block — the guard skips its body on null, it does not stop the method.
Enable <Nullable>enable</Nullable> across all projects and resolve warnings rather than suppressing with `!`.

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	44%	Weak — gated by X4, X5	Capped at Fair by a Critical contributor — resolve it before relying on this lens.
Architecture	78%	Strong	Solid.
Maturity	50%	Adequate — gated by M2	Capped at Fair by a Critical contributor — resolve it before relying on this lens.
Readiness	44%	Weak — gated by P3	Capped at Fair by a Critical contributor — resolve it before relying on this lens.
Security	67%	Adequate — gated by D28	Capped at Fair by a Critical contributor — resolve it before relying on this lens.
Event Sourcing	82%	Strong	Strongest area.
Performance	60%	Adequate	Acceptable, with room to improve.

Unscored — 3 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.

SC1 Supply-chain hygiene — 1 observation(s) recorded · Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score, so there is nothing missing here.
X10 Duplicated predicate — 4 observation(s) recorded · Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score.
X7 Silent fallback defaults — 1 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 — 34 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.
AX7 Slice cohesion — not applicable — not a vertical-slice architecture
AXB1 Runtime evidence locked — no reproducible boot — This repository has nothing the runtime tiers could boot or serve — no markup, no UI framework or web-server dependency, no UI component source, no native UI project and no API definition — nothing here is a surface to boot — so runtime a11y/egress/header evidence has no subject here. Not applicable: this is neither a gap in the scan nor a finding about your code.
AXB2 Runtime readiness — Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score, so there is nothing missing here.
C1 Data Protection — No personal data detected in the analyzed source — no PII-typed entity/column names (Email, FirstName, DateOfBirth, …), no ASP.NET Identity / user-account model, and no stored user credentials. GDPR data-protection controls are therefore N/A here. If this is intentional, record the no-PII posture in an ADR; if the app does process personal data, name those fields conventionally so this dimension activates.
C3 Audit Trail — No personal data detected in the analyzed source — no PII-typed entity/column names (Email, FirstName, DateOfBirth, …), no ASP.NET Identity / user-account model, and no stored user credentials. GDPR data-protection controls are therefore N/A here. If this is intentional, record the no-PII posture in an ADR; if the app does process personal data, name those fields conventionally so this dimension activates.
C4 Data Retention — No personal data detected in the analyzed source — no PII-typed entity/column names (Email, FirstName, DateOfBirth, …), no ASP.NET Identity / user-account model, and no stored user credentials. GDPR data-protection controls are therefore N/A here. If this is intentional, record the no-PII posture in an ADR; if the app does process personal data, name those fields conventionally so this dimension activates.
C5 Data-Subject Rights — No personal data detected in the analyzed source — no PII-typed entity/column names (Email, FirstName, DateOfBirth, …), no ASP.NET Identity / user-account model, and no stored user credentials. GDPR data-protection controls are therefore N/A here. If this is intentional, record the no-PII posture in an ADR; if the app does process personal data, name those fields conventionally so this dimension activates.
D16 Bus Factor — single-maintainer repository — bus factor is not applicable
D22 Internal API Consistency — No intentionally-exposed public API to evaluate for consistency.
D25 ADR Conformance — no ADRs to check
D31 IaC & Container Security — No Infrastructure-as-Code or container manifests found (Dockerfile, Docker Compose, Terraform, Kubernetes/Helm, CloudFormation, ARM, Bicep, Ansible); nothing to scan.
D32 Data Compliance (PII/GDPR) — 2 file(s) were not parsed by semgrep — the PII/GDPR ruleset never ran over them
D36 Supply-chain Provenance & Signing — The CI pipeline builds and tests but publishes no released artifact — no package publish, container push, GitHub release or deployment step. Supply-chain provenance, signing and SBOM attest RELEASED artifacts, so there is nothing to attest here. Add them to the release pipeline when this repo starts shipping artifacts (a published package, a container image, a deployed service or a tagged release). Build integrity and workflow-token hygiene are reported below: they describe what the CI runs and the token it runs with, neither of which is affected by whether the pipeline ships an artifact.
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.
D40 Network Egress Confinement — No Kubernetes/orchestration workloads found in the repository manifests; network egress policy is a cluster-native control that may live at the platform/firewall layer, so there is nothing to assess here.
D41 Kernel & Syscall Confinement — No Kubernetes/orchestration workloads found in the repository manifests; seccomp/AppArmor/SELinux confinement is a workload-level control, so there is nothing to assess here.
D42 Runtime Threat Enforcement — No Kubernetes/orchestration workloads found in the repository manifests; runtime threat-detection and admission-control policy are cluster-level controls, so there is nothing to assess here.
D43 Malicious Dependencies — Not scored — no dependency manifest in a supported ecosystem was read for this repository. A gap in the analyzer's language coverage, NOT a finding that the repository is free of vulnerable dependencies (a Python pyproject.toml/requirements.txt (pip/uv/Poetry), a Swift Package.swift/Package.resolved, a Cargo manifest, a Go module (go.mod/go.sum), a Gradle version catalogue, a Maven POM, an sbt build (build.sbt), composer.json, package.json, a Dart pubspec.yaml, an Elixir mix.exs/mix.lock (Hex), a rebar.config / erlang.mk DEPS (Hex), a Ruby Gemfile/Gemfile.lock or .gemspec (Bundler/RubyGems) — not scanned yet).
D7 Architectural Integrity — no checkable ADRs and no dependency cycles — architectural integrity not assessed
DM1 Domain Modelling — applicable but not scored (5 signals for this style, 3 needed — the count is met but a required primary signal is absent): 3 aggregate root(s) (entities that raise its domain events); 15 aggregate root(s) (AggregateRoot/IAggregateRoot); 6 value object(s); 12 domain event(s); a Domain/Aggregates/ValueObjects layer; 13 aggregate-constrained repository/repositories (IRepository<T> where T : IAggregateRoot); a top-level Examples/ tree: a library or framework whose examples are its consumers — these types are building blocks, not a domain
ED1 Event-Driven — applicable but not scored (2 of 3 signals for this style — below the bar we score at): a message-bus package; 14 CQRS handler(s)
P12 CI test-gate honesty — Reported, not scored — this card publishes what the CI gate does with the test inventory rather than grading it. The findings above are its output.
P7 Outbound HTTP resilience — no outbound HTTP usage detected — no HttpClient/IHttpClientFactory/AddHttpClient in source, and no Refit/RestSharp/Flurl.Http namespace or package reference
PF1 Benchmark discipline — Performance is assessed only for perf-relevant repos — a packaged library, one that ships benchmarks, or one already using allocation-aware APIs. This repo isn't one, so the Performance lens is not applicable and is excluded from the score.
PF2 Allocation hygiene — Performance is assessed only for perf-relevant repos — a packaged library, one that ships benchmarks, or one already using allocation-aware APIs. This repo isn't one, so the Performance lens is not applicable and is excluded from the score.
X6 Hand-rolled structured-format parsing — Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score, so there is nothing missing here.
X9 Subsumed condition operand — Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score, so there is nothing missing here.

Appendix A — Findings (grouped)

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

Critical — 36 finding(s)

D28 · Secrets (history) · High secret · ×8

REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED

D17 · Explicit Debt · WriteOnlyPrivateField · ×7

WriteOnlyPrivateField Providers/EF6/Revo.EF6/DataAccess/Migrations/EF6MigrationsModule.cs:10 — private EF6DataAccessConfigurationSection section — assigned 1 time(s), read never — this field is written and never read anywhere its type can be reached from, so the state it keeps answers no question: every assignment to it computes a value that nothing observes, on every instance, for the lifetime of each one. It reads as a flag the code branches on, and nothing branches on it. Delete the field and its assignments — or, if the value was MEANT to be consulted, the missing read is the defect this row is pointing at, and the branch that should have depended on it is not there.
WriteOnlyPrivateField Providers/EF6/Tests/Revo.EF6.Tests/Projections/EF6EntityEventProjectorTests.cs:12 — private TestProjector sut — assigned 1 time(s), read never — this field is written and never read anywhere its type can be reached from, so the state it keeps answers no question: every assignment to it computes a value that nothing observes, on every instance, for the lifetime of each one. It reads as a flag the code branches on, and nothing branches on it. Delete the field and its assignments — or, if the value was MEANT to be consulted, the missing read is the defect this row is pointing at, and the branch that should have depended on it is not there.
WriteOnlyPrivateField Providers/EFCore/Revo.EFCore/DataAccess/Migrations/EFCoreMigrationsModule.cs:11 — private EFCoreDataAccessConfigurationSection section — assigned 1 time(s), read never — this field is written and never read anywhere its type can be reached from, so the state it keeps answers no question: every assignment to it computes a value that nothing observes, on every instance, for the lifetime of each one. It reads as a flag the code branches on, and nothing branches on it. Delete the field and its assignments — or, if the value was MEANT to be consulted, the missing read is the defect this row is pointing at, and the branch that should have depended on it is not there.
WriteOnlyPrivateField Providers/EFCore/Revo.EFCore/Domain/ReadModelConvention.cs:14 — private EFCoreDataAccessConfigurationSection configurationSection — assigned 1 time(s), read never — this field is written and never read anywhere its type can be reached from, so the state it keeps answers no question: every assignment to it computes a value that nothing observes, on every instance, for the lifetime of each one. It reads as a flag the code branches on, and nothing branches on it. Delete the field and its assignments — or, if the value was MEANT to be consulted, the missing read is the defect this row is pointing at, and the branch that should have depended on it is not there.
WriteOnlyPrivateField Tests/Revo.Infrastructure.Tests/Projections/ProjectionEventListenerTests.cs:23 — private IEntityEventProjector myEntity1Projector — assigned 1 time(s), read never — this field is written and never read anywhere its type can be reached from, so the state it keeps answers no question: every assignment to it computes a value that nothing observes, on every instance, for the lifetime of each one. It reads as a flag the code branches on, and nothing branches on it. Delete the field and its assignments — or, if the value was MEANT to be consulted, the missing read is the defect this row is pointing at, and the branch that should have depended on it is not there.
WriteOnlyPrivateField Tests/Revo.Infrastructure.Tests/Projections/ProjectionEventListenerTests.cs:24 — private IEntityEventProjector myEntity2Projector — assigned 1 time(s), read never — this field is written and never read anywhere its type can be reached from, so the state it keeps answers no question: every assignment to it computes a value that nothing observes, on every instance, for the lifetime of each one. It reads as a flag the code branches on, and nothing branches on it. Delete the field and its assignments — or, if the value was MEANT to be consulted, the missing read is the defect this row is pointing at, and the branch that should have depended on it is not there.
WriteOnlyPrivateField Tests/Revo.Infrastructure.Tests/Repositories/EventSourcedAggregateStoreTests.cs:32 — private IRepositoryFilter repositoryFilter2 — assigned 1 time(s), read never — this field is written and never read anywhere its type can be reached from, so the state it keeps answers no question: every assignment to it computes a value that nothing observes, on every instance, for the lifetime of each one. It reads as a flag the code branches on, and nothing branches on it. Delete the field and its assignments — or, if the value was MEANT to be consulted, the missing read is the defect this row is pointing at, and the branch that should have depended on it is not there.

AX3 · Project dependency cycles · Namespace dependency cycle · ×6

Namespace dependency cycle Revo.Core/Configuration/CoreConfigurationSection.cs:1 — The namespaces Revo.Core.Commands ↔ Revo.Core.Configuration ↔ Revo.Core.Core ↔ Revo.Core.Events ↔ Revo.Core.Transactions depend on each other. The lightest dependency in the cycle is Revo.Core.Configuration → Revo.Core.Commands (Revo.Core.Configuration.CoreConfigurationSection → Revo.Core.Commands.CommandsConfiguration, 1 type pair(s)); cut that one first, e.g. by moving the shared type to a namespace both can use or inverting it behind an interface.
Namespace dependency cycle Revo.Domain/Entities/AggregateRoot.cs:4 — The namespaces Revo.Domain.Entities ↔ Revo.Domain.Entities.Basic ↔ Revo.Domain.Events depend on each other. The lightest dependency in the cycle is Revo.Domain.Entities → Revo.Domain.Entities.Basic (Revo.Domain.Entities.AggregateRoot → Revo.Domain.Entities.Basic.Entity, 1 type pair(s)); cut that one first, e.g. by moving the shared type to a namespace both can use or inverting it behind an interface.
Namespace dependency cycle Providers/EF6/Revo.EF6/DataAccess/Model/ModelMetadataExplorer.cs:11 — The namespaces Revo.EF6.DataAccess.Entities ↔ Revo.EF6.DataAccess.Model depend on each other. The lightest dependency in the cycle is Revo.EF6.DataAccess.Model → Revo.EF6.DataAccess.Entities (Revo.EF6.DataAccess.Model.ModelMetadataExplorer → Revo.EF6.DataAccess.Entities.IDbContextFactory, 1 type pair(s)); cut that one first, e.g. by moving the shared type to a namespace both can use or inverting it behind an interface.
Namespace dependency cycle Revo.Infrastructure/DataAccess/Migrations/DatabaseMigrationsConfiguration.cs:2 — The namespaces Revo.Infrastructure.DataAccess.Migrations ↔ Revo.Infrastructure.DataAccess.Migrations.Providers depend on each other. The lightest dependency in the cycle is Revo.Infrastructure.DataAccess.Migrations → Revo.Infrastructure.DataAccess.Migrations.Providers (Revo.Infrastructure.DataAccess.Migrations.DatabaseMigrationsConfiguration → Revo.Infrastructure.DataAccess.Migrations.Providers.IDatabaseMigrationScripter, 2 type pair(s)); cut that one first, e.g. by moving the shared type to a namespace both can use or inverting it behind an interface.
Namespace dependency cycle Revo.Infrastructure/EventStores/IExternalEventStore.cs:4 — The namespaces Revo.Infrastructure.EventStores ↔ Revo.Infrastructure.Events.Async.Generic depend on each other. The lightest dependency in the cycle is Revo.Infrastructure.EventStores → Revo.Infrastructure.Events.Async.Generic (Revo.Infrastructure.EventStores.IExternalEventStore → Revo.Infrastructure.Events.Async.Generic.ExternalEventRecord, 1 type pair(s)); cut that one first, e.g. by moving the shared type to a namespace both can use or inverting it behind an interface.
Namespace dependency cycle Providers/EFCore/Revo.EFCore/Projections/EFCoreProjectionSubSystem.cs:8 — The namespaces Revo.EFCore.Projections ↔ Revo.EFCore.Repositories depend on each other. The lightest dependency in the cycle is Revo.EFCore.Projections → Revo.EFCore.Repositories (Revo.EFCore.Projections.EFCoreProjectionSubSystem → Revo.EFCore.Repositories.IEFCoreTransactionCoordinator, 1 type pair(s)); cut that one first, e.g. by moving the shared type to a namespace both can use or inverting it behind an interface.

D30 · Dependency Vulnerabilities · High CVE · ×5

REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED

D29 · Static Analysis (SAST) · REDACTED

REDACTED
REDACTED

D29 · Static Analysis (SAST) · REDACTED

REDACTED
REDACTED

AX4 · Dependency direction · Dependency-rule violation · ×1

Dependency-rule violation: Revo.Domain (Domain) → Revo.DataAccess (Infrastructure) Revo.Domain/Revo.Domain.csproj:18 — `Revo.Domain` is a Domain project but references `Revo.DataAccess`, a Infrastructure project. The clean-architecture rule is that dependencies point INWARD — the domain/application core must not depend on outer layers (infrastructure/web). Invert it: define the abstraction in the inner layer and implement it in the outer one.

D10 · Test Quality · No assertions (empty test) · ×1

No assertions (empty test): ChangeAttribute_StoresEntityAttributeValues Extensions/Tests/Revo.Extensions.History.Tests/ChangeTracking/EntityAttributeChangeLoggerTests.cs:69 — Test method has an empty body — it asserts nothing and exercises no code.

D12 · Dependency Hygiene · Vulnerable · ×1

Vulnerable: AutoMapper — REDACTED — High severity. https://github.com/advisories/[GHSA redacted]

D28 · Secrets (history) · REDACTED · ×1

REDACTED

ES2 · Immutable events · Mutable event · ×1

Mutable event: DomainAggregateEvent Revo.Domain/Events/DomainAggregateEvent.cs:5 — This persisted event exposes settable member(s) (AggregateId) — an event is an immutable historical fact. A public setter lets stored history be rewritten after the fact. Use `{ get; init; }` (records) or readonly fields.

X1 · Async correctness · Blocking wait while holding a `lock` · ×1

Blocking wait while holding a `lock` Revo.Infrastructure/DataAccess/DatabaseInitializerLoader.cs:55 — This blocks on a Task **while holding a `lock`**, which is worse than an ordinary sync-over-async in two ways. `await` is illegal inside a `lock` body, so the usual fix — make the caller `async` and await it — cannot be applied where this block stands. And the thread parks while still holding the lock, so it occupies the critical section doing no work: every other caller serialises behind an operation that is only waiting, and if the awaited task itself needs a thread the pool has run out of, they wait forever. Do the async work OUTSIDE the critical section: take the lock only to read the shared state, release it, await the call, then re-take the lock to publish the result — re-checking on re-entry whether another caller won the race and, if so, discarding your result rather than overwriting theirs. Where the critical section genuinely has to span the async call, `lock` is the wrong primitive: use an async-aware one (`SemaphoreSlim` with `await WaitAsync()`) so waiters yield their thread instead of parking it.

Serious — 646 finding(s)

D8 · Code Coverage · Low coverage · ×258

Low coverage: Providers/EasyNetQ/Revo.EasyNetQ/EasyNetQBus.cs Providers/EasyNetQ/Revo.EasyNetQ/EasyNetQBus.cs:1 — 38.1% line coverage (16/42).
Low coverage: Providers/EasyNetQ/Revo.EasyNetQ/EasyNetQModule.cs Providers/EasyNetQ/Revo.EasyNetQ/EasyNetQModule.cs:1 — 0.0% line coverage (0/39).
Low coverage: Providers/EasyNetQ/Revo.EasyNetQ/NullEasyNetQBus.cs Providers/EasyNetQ/Revo.EasyNetQ/NullEasyNetQBus.cs:1 — 0.0% line coverage (0/18).
Low coverage: Providers/EasyNetQ/Revo.EasyNetQ/Configuration/EasyNetQConfigurationExtensions.cs Providers/EasyNetQ/Revo.EasyNetQ/Configuration/EasyNetQConfigurationExtensions.cs:1 — 0.0% line coverage (0/13).
Low coverage: Providers/EasyNetQ/Revo.EasyNetQ/Configuration/EasyNetQEventTransportsConfiguration.cs Providers/EasyNetQ/Revo.EasyNetQ/Configuration/EasyNetQEventTransportsConfiguration.cs:1 — 7.1% line coverage (1/14).
Low coverage: Revo.Core/Transactions/CoordinatedTransaction.cs Revo.Core/Transactions/CoordinatedTransaction.cs:1 — 0.0% line coverage (0/46).
Low coverage: Revo.Core/Security/AuthorizationException.cs Revo.Core/Security/AuthorizationException.cs:1 — 25.0% line coverage (3/12).
Low coverage: Revo.Core/Security/NullCoreSecurityModule.cs Revo.Core/Security/NullCoreSecurityModule.cs:1 — 0.0% line coverage (0/8).
Low coverage: Revo.Core/Security/PermissionTypeCatalogAttribute.cs Revo.Core/Security/PermissionTypeCatalogAttribute.cs:1 — 0.0% line coverage (0/5).
Low coverage: Revo.Core/Security/PermissionTypeIndexer.cs Revo.Core/Security/PermissionTypeIndexer.cs:1 — 0.0% line coverage (0/54).
Low coverage: Revo.Core/Security/PermissionTypeRegistry.cs Revo.Core/Security/PermissionTypeRegistry.cs:1 — 0.0% line coverage (0/25).
Low coverage: Revo.Core/Security/ClaimBased/NullClaimsPrincipalUserResolver.cs Revo.Core/Security/ClaimBased/NullClaimsPrincipalUserResolver.cs:1 — 0.0% line coverage (0/5).
Low coverage: Revo.Core/Lifecycle/LifecycleModule.cs Revo.Core/Lifecycle/LifecycleModule.cs:1 — 0.0% line coverage (0/8).
Low coverage: Revo.Core/Events/PublishEventBufferFactory.cs Revo.Core/Events/PublishEventBufferFactory.cs:1 — 0.0% line coverage (0/7).
Low coverage: Revo.Core/Core/CoreModule.cs Revo.Core/Core/CoreModule.cs:1 — 0.0% line coverage (0/51).
Low coverage: Revo.Core/Core/Environment.cs Revo.Core/Core/Environment.cs:1 — 0.0% line coverage (0/9).
Low coverage: Revo.Core/Core/MemoryUtils.cs Revo.Core/Core/MemoryUtils.cs:1 — 0.0% line coverage (0/6).
Low coverage: Revo.Core/Core/NinjectBindingExtensions.cs Revo.Core/Core/NinjectBindingExtensions.cs:1 — 47.1% line coverage (8/17).
Low coverage: Revo.Core/Core/NinjectServiceLocator.cs Revo.Core/Core/NinjectServiceLocator.cs:1 — 0.0% line coverage (0/16).
Low coverage: Revo.Core/Core/StringExtensions.cs Revo.Core/Core/StringExtensions.cs:1 — 0.0% line coverage (0/30).
Low coverage: Revo.Core/Core/ThreadSleep.cs Revo.Core/Core/ThreadSleep.cs:1 — 0.0% line coverage (0/6).
Low coverage: Revo.Core/Configuration/ConfigurationException.cs Revo.Core/Configuration/ConfigurationException.cs:1 — 0.0% line coverage (0/12).
Low coverage: Revo.Core/Configuration/CoreConfigurationExtensions.cs Revo.Core/Configuration/CoreConfigurationExtensions.cs:1 — 0.0% line coverage (0/15).
Low coverage: Revo.Core/Commands/CommandBusMiddlewareFactory.cs Revo.Core/Commands/CommandBusMiddlewareFactory.cs:1 — 0.0% line coverage (0/8).
Low coverage: Revo.Core/Commands/CommandGateway.cs Revo.Core/Commands/CommandGateway.cs:1 — 0.0% line coverage (0/20).
+ 233 more in this group — see findings.md.

D17 · Explicit Debt · Dead code · ×101

Dead code: ToSeparatedString Revo.Core/Collections/Extensions.cs:10 — Method ToSeparatedString — Roslyn's SymbolFinder walked every project the solution loads, including Revo.Core, and found no reference to it. That walk cannot see three kinds of caller, so check them before removing it: code outside the solution file (a solution is a curated list, not the repository — a sibling test tree with its own .sln is invisible), a call resolved by reflection or dependency injection from the symbol's name, and any project the workspace could not load. This is 'no caller found by this walk', not a verdict that the symbol is unused.
Dead code: AsNotNull Revo.Core/Collections/Extensions.cs:24 — Method AsNotNull — Roslyn's SymbolFinder walked every project the solution loads, including Revo.Core, and found no reference to it. That walk cannot see three kinds of caller, so check them before removing it: code outside the solution file (a solution is a curated list, not the repository — a sibling test tree with its own .sln is invisible), a call resolved by reflection or dependency injection from the symbol's name, and any project the workspace could not load. This is 'no caller found by this walk', not a verdict that the symbol is unused.
Dead code: WithTenantContext Revo.Core/Commands/CommandExecutionOptions.cs:28 — Method WithTenantContext — Roslyn's SymbolFinder walked every project the solution loads, including Revo.Core, and found no reference to it. That walk cannot see three kinds of caller, so check them before removing it: code outside the solution file (a solution is a curated list, not the repository — a sibling test tree with its own .sln is invisible), a call resolved by reflection or dependency injection from the symbol's name, and any project the workspace could not load. This is 'no caller found by this walk', not a verdict that the symbol is unused.
Dead code: EntityQueryWithContext Revo.Core/Commands/EntityQueryWithContext.cs:5 — NamedType EntityQueryWithContext — Roslyn's SymbolFinder walked every project the solution loads, including Revo.Core, and found no reference to it. That walk cannot see three kinds of caller, so check them before removing it: code outside the solution file (a solution is a curated list, not the repository — a sibling test tree with its own .sln is invisible), a call resolved by reflection or dependency injection from the symbol's name, and any project the workspace could not load. This is 'no caller found by this walk', not a verdict that the symbol is unused.
Dead code: RemoveRoute Revo.Core/Commands/ICommandRouter.cs:22 — Method RemoveRoute — Roslyn's SymbolFinder walked every project the solution loads, including Revo.Core, and found no reference to it. That walk cannot see three kinds of caller, so check them before removing it: code outside the solution file (a solution is a curated list, not the repository — a sibling test tree with its own .sln is invisible), a call resolved by reflection or dependency injection from the symbol's name, and any project the workspace could not load. This is 'no caller found by this walk', not a verdict that the symbol is unused.
Dead code: ICommandWithContext Revo.Core/Commands/ICommandWithContext.cs:3 — NamedType ICommandWithContext — Roslyn's SymbolFinder walked every project the solution loads, including Revo.Core, and found no reference to it. That walk cannot see three kinds of caller, so check them before removing it: code outside the solution file (a solution is a curated list, not the repository — a sibling test tree with its own .sln is invisible), a call resolved by reflection or dependency injection from the symbol's name, and any project the workspace could not load. This is 'no caller found by this walk', not a verdict that the symbol is unused.
Dead code: Memcmp Revo.Core/Core/MemoryUtils.cs:16 — Method Memcmp — Roslyn's SymbolFinder walked every project the solution loads, including Revo.Core, and found no reference to it. That walk cannot see three kinds of caller, so check them before removing it: code outside the solution file (a solution is a curated list, not the repository — a sibling test tree with its own .sln is invisible), a call resolved by reflection or dependency injection from the symbol's name, and any project the workspace could not load. This is 'no caller found by this walk', not a verdict that the symbol is unused.
Dead code: InRequestOrJobScope Revo.Core/Core/NinjectBindingExtensions.cs:34 — Method InRequestOrJobScope — Roslyn's SymbolFinder walked every project the solution loads, including Revo.Core, and found no reference to it. That walk cannot see three kinds of caller, so check them before removing it: code outside the solution file (a solution is a curated list, not the repository — a sibling test tree with its own .sln is invisible), a call resolved by reflection or dependency injection from the symbol's name, and any project the workspace could not load. This is 'no caller found by this walk', not a verdict that the symbol is unused.
Dead code: IndexOfI Revo.Core/Core/StringExtensions.cs:9 — Method IndexOfI — Roslyn's SymbolFinder walked every project the solution loads, including Revo.Core, and found no reference to it. That walk cannot see three kinds of caller, so check them before removing it: code outside the solution file (a solution is a curated list, not the repository — a sibling test tree with its own .sln is invisible), a call resolved by reflection or dependency injection from the symbol's name, and any project the workspace could not load. This is 'no caller found by this walk', not a verdict that the symbol is unused.
Dead code: IndexOfI Revo.Core/Core/StringExtensions.cs:14 — Method IndexOfI — Roslyn's SymbolFinder walked every project the solution loads, including Revo.Core, and found no reference to it. That walk cannot see three kinds of caller, so check them before removing it: code outside the solution file (a solution is a curated list, not the repository — a sibling test tree with its own .sln is invisible), a call resolved by reflection or dependency injection from the symbol's name, and any project the workspace could not load. This is 'no caller found by this walk', not a verdict that the symbol is unused.
Dead code: IndexOfI Revo.Core/Core/StringExtensions.cs:19 — Method IndexOfI — Roslyn's SymbolFinder walked every project the solution loads, including Revo.Core, and found no reference to it. That walk cannot see three kinds of caller, so check them before removing it: code outside the solution file (a solution is a curated list, not the repository — a sibling test tree with its own .sln is invisible), a call resolved by reflection or dependency injection from the symbol's name, and any project the workspace could not load. This is 'no caller found by this walk', not a verdict that the symbol is unused.
Dead code: LastIndexOfI Revo.Core/Core/StringExtensions.cs:24 — Method LastIndexOfI — Roslyn's SymbolFinder walked every project the solution loads, including Revo.Core, and found no reference to it. That walk cannot see three kinds of caller, so check them before removing it: code outside the solution file (a solution is a curated list, not the repository — a sibling test tree with its own .sln is invisible), a call resolved by reflection or dependency injection from the symbol's name, and any project the workspace could not load. This is 'no caller found by this walk', not a verdict that the symbol is unused.
Dead code: RemoveLastBackslash Revo.Core/Core/StringExtensions.cs:34 — Method RemoveLastBackslash — Roslyn's SymbolFinder walked every project the solution loads, including Revo.Core, and found no reference to it. That walk cannot see three kinds of caller, so check them before removing it: code outside the solution file (a solution is a curated list, not the repository — a sibling test tree with its own .sln is invisible), a call resolved by reflection or dependency injection from the symbol's name, and any project the workspace could not load. This is 'no caller found by this walk', not a verdict that the symbol is unused.
Dead code: RemoveDiacritics Revo.Core/Core/StringExtensions.cs:45 — Method RemoveDiacritics — Roslyn's SymbolFinder walked every project the solution loads, including Revo.Core, and found no reference to it. That walk cannot see three kinds of caller, so check them before removing it: code outside the solution file (a solution is a curated list, not the repository — a sibling test tree with its own .sln is invisible), a call resolved by reflection or dependency injection from the symbol's name, and any project the workspace could not load. This is 'no caller found by this walk', not a verdict that the symbol is unused.
Dead code: IResourceManager Revo.Core/IO/Resources/IResourceManager.cs:5 — NamedType IResourceManager — Roslyn's SymbolFinder walked every project the solution loads, including Revo.Core, and found no reference to it. That walk cannot see three kinds of caller, so check them before removing it: code outside the solution file (a solution is a curated list, not the repository — a sibling test tree with its own .sln is invisible), a call resolved by reflection or dependency injection from the symbol's name, and any project the workspace could not load. This is 'no caller found by this walk', not a verdict that the symbol is unused.
Dead code: GetPermissionTypeByName Revo.Core/Security/IPermissionTypeRegistry.cs:11 — Method GetPermissionTypeByName — Roslyn's SymbolFinder walked every project the solution loads, including Revo.Core, and found no reference to it. That walk cannot see three kinds of caller, so check them before removing it: code outside the solution file (a solution is a curated list, not the repository — a sibling test tree with its own .sln is invisible), a call resolved by reflection or dependency injection from the symbol's name, and any project the workspace could not load. This is 'no caller found by this walk', not a verdict that the symbol is unused.
Dead code: ITransactionListener Revo.Core/Transactions/ITransactionListener.cs:5 — NamedType ITransactionListener — Roslyn's SymbolFinder walked every project the solution loads, including Revo.Core, and found no reference to it. That walk cannot see three kinds of caller, so check them before removing it: code outside the solution file (a solution is a curated list, not the repository — a sibling test tree with its own .sln is invisible), a call resolved by reflection or dependency injection from the symbol's name, and any project the workspace could not load. This is 'no caller found by this walk', not a verdict that the symbol is unused.
Dead code: CreateTransaction Revo.Core/Transactions/ITransactionProvider.cs:5 — Method CreateTransaction — Roslyn's SymbolFinder walked every project the solution loads, including Revo.Core, and found no reference to it. That walk cannot see three kinds of caller, so check them before removing it: code outside the solution file (a solution is a curated list, not the repository — a sibling test tree with its own .sln is invisible), a call resolved by reflection or dependency injection from the symbol's name, and any project the workspace could not load. This is 'no caller found by this walk', not a verdict that the symbol is unused.
Dead code: FindType Revo.Core/Types/ITypeExplorer.cs:11 — Method FindType — Roslyn's SymbolFinder walked every project the solution loads, including Revo.Core, and found no reference to it. That walk cannot see three kinds of caller, so check them before removing it: code outside the solution file (a solution is a curated list, not the repository — a sibling test tree with its own .sln is invisible), a call resolved by reflection or dependency injection from the symbol's name, and any project the workspace could not load. This is 'no caller found by this walk', not a verdict that the symbol is unused.
Dead code: ClassEntityDto Revo.Domain/Dto/ClassEntityDto.cs:5 — NamedType ClassEntityDto — Roslyn's SymbolFinder walked every project the solution loads, including Revo.Domain, and found no reference to it. That walk cannot see three kinds of caller, so check them before removing it: code outside the solution file (a solution is a curated list, not the repository — a sibling test tree with its own .sln is invisible), a call resolved by reflection or dependency injection from the symbol's name, and any project the workspace could not load. This is 'no caller found by this walk', not a verdict that the symbol is unused.
Dead code: BasicClassEntity Revo.Domain/Entities/Basic/BasicClassEntity.cs:10 — NamedType BasicClassEntity — Roslyn's SymbolFinder walked every project the solution loads, including Revo.Domain, and found no reference to it. That walk cannot see three kinds of caller, so check them before removing it: code outside the solution file (a solution is a curated list, not the repository — a sibling test tree with its own .sln is invisible), a call resolved by reflection or dependency injection from the symbol's name, and any project the workspace could not load. This is 'no caller found by this walk', not a verdict that the symbol is unused.
Dead code: GetPublishDate Revo.Domain/Events/MetadataExtensions.cs:40 — Method GetPublishDate — Roslyn's SymbolFinder walked every project the solution loads, including Revo.Domain, and found no reference to it. That walk cannot see three kinds of caller, so check them before removing it: code outside the solution file (a solution is a curated list, not the repository — a sibling test tree with its own .sln is invisible), a call resolved by reflection or dependency injection from the symbol's name, and any project the workspace could not load. This is 'no caller found by this walk', not a verdict that the symbol is unused.
Dead code: GetStoreDate Revo.Domain/Events/MetadataExtensions.cs:51 — Method GetStoreDate — Roslyn's SymbolFinder walked every project the solution loads, including Revo.Domain, and found no reference to it. That walk cannot see three kinds of caller, so check them before removing it: code outside the solution file (a solution is a curated list, not the repository — a sibling test tree with its own .sln is invisible), a call resolved by reflection or dependency injection from the symbol's name, and any project the workspace could not load. This is 'no caller found by this walk', not a verdict that the symbol is unused.
Dead code: GetUserId Revo.Domain/Events/MetadataExtensions.cs:62 — Method GetUserId — Roslyn's SymbolFinder walked every project the solution loads, including Revo.Domain, and found no reference to it. That walk cannot see three kinds of caller, so check them before removing it: code outside the solution file (a solution is a curated list, not the repository — a sibling test tree with its own .sln is invisible), a call resolved by reflection or dependency injection from the symbol's name, and any project the workspace could not load. This is 'no caller found by this walk', not a verdict that the symbol is unused.
Dead code: ClassEntityView Revo.Domain/ReadModel/ClassEntityView.cs:5 — NamedType ClassEntityView — Roslyn's SymbolFinder walked every project the solution loads, including Revo.Domain, and found no reference to it. That walk cannot see three kinds of caller, so check them before removing it: code outside the solution file (a solution is a curated list, not the repository — a sibling test tree with its own .sln is invisible), a call resolved by reflection or dependency injection from the symbol's name, and any project the workspace could not load. This is 'no caller found by this walk', not a verdict that the symbol is unused.
+ 76 more in this group — see findings.md.

D17 · Explicit Debt · TodoComment · ×39

TodoComment Extensions/Revo.Extensions.History/ChangeTracking/EntityAttributeChangeLogger.cs:59 — // TODO better solution without reflection — 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 Extensions/Tests/Revo.Extensions.History.Tests/ChangeTracking/EntityAttributeChangeLoggerTests.cs:33 — // TODO check IDs — 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 Providers/EF6/Revo.EF6/Configuration/EF6InfrastructureConfigurationExtensions.cs:87 — // TODO ensure EF6 aggregate stores get injected the correct EF6 repository/event store (in case there are more registered) — 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 Providers/EF6/Revo.EF6/DataAccess/Entities/DbContextFactory.cs:85 — // TODO convert this to an EF convention — 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 Providers/EF6/Revo.EF6/DataAccess/Entities/EF6CrudRepository.cs:455 — // TODO should cast — 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 Providers/EF6/Revo.EF6/DataAccess/Entities/EF6CrudRepository.cs:458 — // TODO should cast — 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 Providers/EF6/Revo.EF6/DataAccess/Entities/EF6CrudRepository.cs:461 — // TODO should cast — 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 Providers/EFCore/Revo.EFCore/DataAccess/Entities/EFCoreCrudRepository.cs:482 — // TODO should cast — 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 Providers/EFCore/Revo.EFCore/DataAccess/Entities/EFCoreCrudRepository.cs:485 — // TODO should cast — 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 Providers/EFCore/Revo.EFCore/DataAccess/Entities/EFCoreCrudRepository.cs:488 — // TODO should cast — 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 Providers/EF6/Revo.EF6/DataAccess/Entities/EF6DatabaseAcccess.cs:70 — //TODO: better solution — 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 Providers/EF6/Revo.EF6/DataAccess/Entities/EF6DatabaseAcccess.cs:86 — //TODO: better solution — 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 Providers/EF6/Revo.EF6/DataAccess/Model/ModelMetadataExplorer.cs:129 — /* TODO */ — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment Providers/EF6/Revo.EF6/DataAccess/Model/ModelMetadataExplorer.cs:129 — //TODO: dispose or not? — 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 Providers/EF6/Revo.EF6/Repositories/EF6RepositoriesModule.cs:20 — // TODO ensure the aggregate stores get injected the correct EF6 repository/event store (in case there are more registered) — 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 Providers/EF6/Tests/Revo.EF6.Tests/Projections/EF6EntityEventProjectorTests.cs:21 — // TODO? — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
TodoComment Providers/EFCore/Revo.EFCore/Repositories/EFCoreCrudAggregateStore.cs:46 — // TODO do a rollback on commited aggregates? — 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 Providers/EFCore/Revo.EFCore/Repositories/EFCoreEventSourcedAggregateStore.cs:47 — // TODO do a rollback on commited aggregates? — 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 Revo.Core/Commands/LocalCommandBus.cs:95 — // TODO test with contravariant handlers — 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 Revo.Core/Events/PublishEventBuffer.cs:21 — // TODO exception handling (i.e. throw away the remaining events as well?) — 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 Revo.Domain/Entities/EventSourcing/EventSourcedAggregateRoot.cs:35 — // TODO throw if not at initial state (Version 0 and no uncommittted events?) — 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 Revo.Infrastructure/DataAccess/Migrations/DatabaseMigrationRegistry.cs:101 — // TODO check for cyclic dependencies — 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 Revo.Infrastructure/DataAccess/Migrations/DatabaseMigrationSelector.cs:204 — // TODO maybe return without errors if there are migrations for this module with different tags? — 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 Revo.Infrastructure/Events/Async/AsyncEventExecutionCatchUp.cs:58 — // TODO reschedule? — 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 Revo.Infrastructure/Events/Async/AsyncEventExecutionCatchUp.cs:84 — // TODO reschedule? — 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.
+ 14 more in this group — see findings.md.

X2 · Cancellation propagation · Async method without CancellationToken · ×39

Async method without CancellationToken: PreFilterAsync Revo.Core/Commands/FilterCommandBusMiddleware.cs:43 — No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
Async method without CancellationToken: PostFilterAsync Revo.Core/Commands/FilterCommandBusMiddleware.cs:52 — No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
Async method without CancellationToken: FilterExceptionAsync Revo.Core/Commands/FilterCommandBusMiddleware.cs:61 — No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
Async method without CancellationToken: HandleNext Revo.Core/Commands/UnitOfWorkCommandBusMiddleware.cs:40 — No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
Async method without CancellationToken: SleepAsync Revo.Core/Core/ThreadSleep.cs:14 — No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
Async method without CancellationToken: CheckAuthorizationAsync Revo.Core/Security/UserPermissionAuthorizer.cs:22 — No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
Async method without CancellationToken: CheckAuthorizationAsync Revo.Core/Security/UserPermissionAuthorizer.cs:29 — No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
Async method without CancellationToken: CheckCurrentUserAuthorizationAsync Revo.Core/Security/UserPermissionAuthorizer.cs:36 — No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
Async method without CancellationToken: CheckCurrentUserAuthorizationAsync Revo.Core/Security/UserPermissionAuthorizer.cs:43 — No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
Async method without CancellationToken: CommitAsync Revo.Core/Transactions/CoordinatedTransaction.cs:24 — No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
Async method without CancellationToken: DoCommitAsync Revo.Core/Transactions/CoordinatedTransaction.cs:41 — No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
Async method without CancellationToken: CommitAsync Revo.Core/Transactions/UnitOfWork.cs:45 — No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
Async method without CancellationToken: SelectNotificationsForReleaseAsync Extensions/Revo.Extensions.Notifications/Channels/Buffering/AggregatingBufferGovernor.cs:23 — No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
Async method without CancellationToken: PushNotificationAsync Extensions/Revo.Extensions.Notifications/Channels/Buffering/BufferedAdaptorNotificationChannel.cs:18 — No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
Async method without CancellationToken: CommitAsync Extensions/Revo.Extensions.Notifications/Channels/Buffering/BufferedNotificationStore.cs:20 — No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
Async method without CancellationToken: Add Extensions/Revo.Extensions.Notifications/Channels/Buffering/BufferedNotificationStore.cs:26 — No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
Async method without CancellationToken: PushNotificationAsync Extensions/Revo.Extensions.Notifications/Channels/Buffering/BufferingNotificationChannel.cs:33 — No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
Async method without CancellationToken: AddNotification Extensions/Revo.Extensions.Notifications/Channels/Buffering/BufferingNotificationChannel.cs:43 — No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
Async method without CancellationToken: ProcessNotificationsAsync Extensions/Revo.Extensions.Notifications/Channels/Buffering/NotificationPipeline.cs:19 — No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
Async method without CancellationToken: SendNotificationsAsync Extensions/Revo.Extensions.Notifications/Channels/Mail/MailBufferedNotificationChannel.cs:20 — No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
Async method without CancellationToken: SendMessages Extensions/Revo.Extensions.Notifications/Channels/Mail/SmtpMailNotificationSender.cs:16 — No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
Async method without CancellationToken: PushNotificationAsync Extensions/Revo.Extensions.Notifications/NotificationBus.cs:16 — No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
Async method without CancellationToken: PushNotificationsAsync Extensions/Revo.Extensions.Notifications/NotificationBus.cs:26 — No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
Async method without CancellationToken: CommitAsync Extensions/Revo.Extensions.Notifications/NotificationBus.cs:44 — No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
Async method without CancellationToken: GetChangeAsync Extensions/Revo.Extensions.History/ChangeTracking/ChangeTracker.cs:61 — No CancellationToken parameter — this work can't be stopped early once started.
+ 14 more in this group — see findings.md.

GD1 · Unfinished & placeholder code · Unfinished stub · ×37

Unfinished stub — throws NotImplementedException Revo.Testing/Infrastructure/Repositories/FakeRepository.cs:29 — A shipped member still throws NotImplementedException — generated scaffolding that was never completed. Implement it or remove the dead surface.
Unfinished stub — throws NotImplementedException Revo.DataAccess/InMemory/InMemoryCrudRepository.cs:22 — A shipped member still throws NotImplementedException — generated scaffolding that was never completed. Implement it or remove the dead surface.
Unfinished stub — throws NotImplementedException Revo.DataAccess/InMemory/InMemoryCrudRepository.cs:32 — A shipped member still throws NotImplementedException — generated scaffolding that was never completed. Implement it or remove the dead surface.
Unfinished stub — throws NotImplementedException Revo.DataAccess/InMemory/InMemoryCrudRepository.cs:37 — A shipped member still throws NotImplementedException — generated scaffolding that was never completed. Implement it or remove the dead surface.
Unfinished stub — throws NotImplementedException Revo.DataAccess/InMemory/InMemoryCrudRepository.cs:97 — A shipped member still throws NotImplementedException — generated scaffolding that was never completed. Implement it or remove the dead surface.
Unfinished stub — throws NotImplementedException Revo.DataAccess/InMemory/InMemoryCrudRepository.cs:110 — A shipped member still throws NotImplementedException — generated scaffolding that was never completed. Implement it or remove the dead surface.
Unfinished stub — throws NotImplementedException Revo.DataAccess/InMemory/InMemoryCrudRepository.cs:115 — A shipped member still throws NotImplementedException — generated scaffolding that was never completed. Implement it or remove the dead surface.
Unfinished stub — throws NotImplementedException Revo.DataAccess/InMemory/InMemoryCrudRepository.cs:217 — A shipped member still throws NotImplementedException — generated scaffolding that was never completed. Implement it or remove the dead surface.
Unfinished stub — throws NotImplementedException Revo.DataAccess/InMemory/InMemoryCrudRepository.cs:222 — A shipped member still throws NotImplementedException — generated scaffolding that was never completed. Implement it or remove the dead surface.
Unfinished stub — throws NotImplementedException Revo.DataAccess/InMemory/InMemoryCrudRepository.cs:227 — A shipped member still throws NotImplementedException — generated scaffolding that was never completed. Implement it or remove the dead surface.
Unfinished stub — throws NotImplementedException Providers/EF6/Revo.EF6/DataAccess/InMemory/EF6InMemoryCrudRepository.cs:16 — A shipped member still throws NotImplementedException — generated scaffolding that was never completed. Implement it or remove the dead surface.
Unfinished stub — throws NotImplementedException Providers/RavenDB/Revo.RavenDB/DataAccess/RavenCrudRepository.cs:30 — A shipped member still throws NotImplementedException — generated scaffolding that was never completed. Implement it or remove the dead surface.
Unfinished stub — throws NotImplementedException Providers/RavenDB/Revo.RavenDB/DataAccess/RavenCrudRepository.cs:35 — A shipped member still throws NotImplementedException — generated scaffolding that was never completed. Implement it or remove the dead surface.
Unfinished stub — throws NotImplementedException Providers/RavenDB/Revo.RavenDB/DataAccess/RavenCrudRepository.cs:40 — A shipped member still throws NotImplementedException — generated scaffolding that was never completed. Implement it or remove the dead surface.
Unfinished stub — throws NotImplementedException Providers/RavenDB/Revo.RavenDB/DataAccess/RavenCrudRepository.cs:45 — A shipped member still throws NotImplementedException — generated scaffolding that was never completed. Implement it or remove the dead surface.
Unfinished stub — throws NotImplementedException Providers/RavenDB/Revo.RavenDB/DataAccess/RavenCrudRepository.cs:90 — A shipped member still throws NotImplementedException — generated scaffolding that was never completed. Implement it or remove the dead surface.
Unfinished stub — throws NotImplementedException Providers/RavenDB/Revo.RavenDB/DataAccess/RavenCrudRepository.cs:95 — A shipped member still throws NotImplementedException — generated scaffolding that was never completed. Implement it or remove the dead surface.
Unfinished stub — throws NotImplementedException Providers/RavenDB/Revo.RavenDB/DataAccess/RavenCrudRepository.cs:110 — A shipped member still throws NotImplementedException — generated scaffolding that was never completed. Implement it or remove the dead surface.
Unfinished stub — throws NotImplementedException Providers/RavenDB/Revo.RavenDB/DataAccess/RavenCrudRepository.cs:115 — A shipped member still throws NotImplementedException — generated scaffolding that was never completed. Implement it or remove the dead surface.
Unfinished stub — throws NotImplementedException Providers/RavenDB/Revo.RavenDB/DataAccess/RavenCrudRepository.cs:120 — A shipped member still throws NotImplementedException — generated scaffolding that was never completed. Implement it or remove the dead surface.
Unfinished stub — throws NotImplementedException Providers/RavenDB/Revo.RavenDB/DataAccess/RavenCrudRepository.cs:125 — A shipped member still throws NotImplementedException — generated scaffolding that was never completed. Implement it or remove the dead surface.
Unfinished stub — throws NotImplementedException Providers/RavenDB/Revo.RavenDB/DataAccess/RavenCrudRepository.cs:151 — A shipped member still throws NotImplementedException — generated scaffolding that was never completed. Implement it or remove the dead surface.
Unfinished stub — throws NotImplementedException Providers/RavenDB/Revo.RavenDB/DataAccess/RavenCrudRepository.cs:181 — A shipped member still throws NotImplementedException — generated scaffolding that was never completed. Implement it or remove the dead surface.
Unfinished stub — throws NotImplementedException Providers/RavenDB/Revo.RavenDB/DataAccess/RavenCrudRepository.cs:186 — A shipped member still throws NotImplementedException — generated scaffolding that was never completed. Implement it or remove the dead surface.
Unfinished stub — throws NotImplementedException Providers/RavenDB/Revo.RavenDB/DataAccess/RavenCrudRepository.cs:191 — A shipped member still throws NotImplementedException — generated scaffolding that was never completed. Implement it or remove the dead surface.
+ 12 more in this group — see findings.md.

IC1 · Incompleteness & stubs · Unfinished stub · ×36

Unfinished stub — throws NotImplementedException Providers/EF6/Revo.EF6/DataAccess/InMemory/EF6InMemoryCrudRepository.cs:16 — `DatabaseAccess` is a shipped property whose accessors only throw NotImplementedException — scaffolding that was never completed. Implement it or remove the dead surface.
Unfinished stub — throws NotImplementedException Providers/EFCore/Revo.EFCore/DataAccess/InMemory/EFCoreInMemoryCrudRepository.cs:12 — `FromSqlInterpolated` is a shipped member whose whole body throws NotImplementedException — scaffolding that was never completed. Implement it or remove the dead surface.
Unfinished stub — throws NotImplementedException Providers/EFCore/Revo.EFCore/DataAccess/InMemory/EFCoreInMemoryCrudRepository.cs:17 — `FromSqlRaw` is a shipped member whose whole body throws NotImplementedException — scaffolding that was never completed. Implement it or remove the dead surface.
Unfinished stub — throws NotImplementedException Providers/EFCore/Revo.EFCore/DataAccess/InMemory/EFCoreInMemoryDatabaseAccess.cs:21 — `FromSqlInterpolated` is a shipped member whose whole body throws NotImplementedException — scaffolding that was never completed. Implement it or remove the dead surface.
Unfinished stub — throws NotImplementedException Providers/EFCore/Revo.EFCore/DataAccess/InMemory/EFCoreInMemoryDatabaseAccess.cs:26 — `FromSqlRaw` is a shipped member whose whole body throws NotImplementedException — scaffolding that was never completed. Implement it or remove the dead surface.
Unfinished stub — throws NotImplementedException Providers/EFCore/Revo.EFCore/DataAccess/InMemory/EFCoreInMemoryDatabaseAccess.cs:31 — `GetDbContext` is a shipped member whose whole body throws NotImplementedException — scaffolding that was never completed. Implement it or remove the dead surface.
Unfinished stub — throws NotImplementedException Providers/EFCore/Revo.EFCore/DataAccess/InMemory/EFCoreInMemoryDatabaseAccess.cs:36 — `GetDbContext` is a shipped member whose whole body throws NotImplementedException — scaffolding that was never completed. Implement it or remove the dead surface.
Unfinished stub — throws NotImplementedException Providers/RavenDB/Revo.RavenDB/DataAccess/RavenCrudRepository.cs:30 — `Get` is a shipped member whose whole body throws NotImplementedException — scaffolding that was never completed. Implement it or remove the dead surface.
Unfinished stub — throws NotImplementedException Providers/RavenDB/Revo.RavenDB/DataAccess/RavenCrudRepository.cs:35 — `Get` is a shipped member whose whole body throws NotImplementedException — scaffolding that was never completed. Implement it or remove the dead surface.
Unfinished stub — throws NotImplementedException Providers/RavenDB/Revo.RavenDB/DataAccess/RavenCrudRepository.cs:40 — `GetAsync` is a shipped member whose whole body throws NotImplementedException — scaffolding that was never completed. Implement it or remove the dead surface.
Unfinished stub — throws NotImplementedException Providers/RavenDB/Revo.RavenDB/DataAccess/RavenCrudRepository.cs:45 — `GetAsync` is a shipped member whose whole body throws NotImplementedException — scaffolding that was never completed. Implement it or remove the dead surface.
Unfinished stub — throws NotImplementedException Providers/RavenDB/Revo.RavenDB/DataAccess/RavenCrudRepository.cs:90 — `FirstOrDefault` is a shipped member whose whole body throws NotImplementedException — scaffolding that was never completed. Implement it or remove the dead surface.
Unfinished stub — throws NotImplementedException Providers/RavenDB/Revo.RavenDB/DataAccess/RavenCrudRepository.cs:95 — `First` is a shipped member whose whole body throws NotImplementedException — scaffolding that was never completed. Implement it or remove the dead surface.
Unfinished stub — throws NotImplementedException Providers/RavenDB/Revo.RavenDB/DataAccess/RavenCrudRepository.cs:110 — `Find` is a shipped member whose whole body throws NotImplementedException — scaffolding that was never completed. Implement it or remove the dead surface.
Unfinished stub — throws NotImplementedException Providers/RavenDB/Revo.RavenDB/DataAccess/RavenCrudRepository.cs:115 — `Find` is a shipped member whose whole body throws NotImplementedException — scaffolding that was never completed. Implement it or remove the dead surface.
Unfinished stub — throws NotImplementedException Providers/RavenDB/Revo.RavenDB/DataAccess/RavenCrudRepository.cs:120 — `FindAsync` is a shipped member whose whole body throws NotImplementedException — scaffolding that was never completed. Implement it or remove the dead surface.
Unfinished stub — throws NotImplementedException Providers/RavenDB/Revo.RavenDB/DataAccess/RavenCrudRepository.cs:125 — `FindAsync` is a shipped member whose whole body throws NotImplementedException — scaffolding that was never completed. Implement it or remove the dead surface.
Unfinished stub — throws NotImplementedException Providers/RavenDB/Revo.RavenDB/DataAccess/RavenCrudRepository.cs:151 — `FindAllWithAdded` is a shipped member whose whole body throws NotImplementedException — scaffolding that was never completed. Implement it or remove the dead surface.
Unfinished stub — throws NotImplementedException Providers/RavenDB/Revo.RavenDB/DataAccess/RavenCrudRepository.cs:181 — `WhereWithAdded` is a shipped member whose whole body throws NotImplementedException — scaffolding that was never completed. Implement it or remove the dead surface.
Unfinished stub — throws NotImplementedException Providers/RavenDB/Revo.RavenDB/DataAccess/RavenCrudRepository.cs:186 — `GetEntities` is a shipped member whose whole body throws NotImplementedException — scaffolding that was never completed. Implement it or remove the dead surface.
Unfinished stub — throws NotImplementedException Providers/RavenDB/Revo.RavenDB/DataAccess/RavenCrudRepository.cs:191 — `GetEntityState` is a shipped member whose whole body throws NotImplementedException — scaffolding that was never completed. Implement it or remove the dead surface.
Unfinished stub — throws NotImplementedException Providers/RavenDB/Revo.RavenDB/DataAccess/RavenCrudRepository.cs:196 — `SetEntityState` is a shipped member whose whole body throws NotImplementedException — scaffolding that was never completed. Implement it or remove the dead surface.
Unfinished stub — throws NotImplementedException Providers/RavenDB/Revo.RavenDB/DataAccess/RavenCrudRepository.cs:201 — `IsAttached` is a shipped member whose whole body throws NotImplementedException — scaffolding that was never completed. Implement it or remove the dead surface.
Unfinished stub — throws NotImplementedException Providers/RavenDB/Revo.RavenDB/DataAccess/RavenCrudRepository.cs:206 — `Attach` is a shipped member whose whole body throws NotImplementedException — scaffolding that was never completed. Implement it or remove the dead surface.
Unfinished stub — throws NotImplementedException Providers/RavenDB/Revo.RavenDB/DataAccess/RavenCrudRepository.cs:211 — `AttachRange` is a shipped member whose whole body throws NotImplementedException — scaffolding that was never completed. Implement it or remove the dead surface.
+ 11 more in this group — see findings.md.

D12 · Dependency Hygiene · Deprecated · ×11

Deprecated: xunit Tests/Revo.Core.Tests/Revo.Core.Tests.csproj:23 — xunit 2.9.3 — Legacy — the publisher's replacement is `xunit.v3`; that is the next major line under a new package id, so the move is a breaking rename rather than a version bump — budget for API changes in the code that uses it, not only the reference swap.
Deprecated: xunit Tests/Revo.Domain.Tests/Revo.Domain.Tests.csproj:17 — xunit 2.9.3 — Legacy — the publisher's replacement is `xunit.v3`; that is the next major line under a new package id, so the move is a breaking rename rather than a version bump — budget for API changes in the code that uses it, not only the reference swap.
Deprecated: xunit Tests/Revo.DataAccess.Tests/Revo.DataAccess.Tests.csproj:16 — xunit 2.9.3 — Legacy — the publisher's replacement is `xunit.v3`; that is the next major line under a new package id, so the move is a breaking rename rather than a version bump — budget for API changes in the code that uses it, not only the reference swap.
Deprecated: xunit Tests/Revo.Infrastructure.Tests/Revo.Infrastructure.Tests.csproj:22 — xunit 2.9.3 — Legacy — the publisher's replacement is `xunit.v3`; that is the next major line under a new package id, so the move is a breaking rename rather than a version bump — budget for API changes in the code that uses it, not only the reference swap.
Deprecated: xunit Providers/EF6/Tests/Revo.EF6.Tests/Revo.EF6.Tests.csproj:15 — xunit 2.9.3 — Legacy — the publisher's replacement is `xunit.v3`; that is the next major line under a new package id, so the move is a breaking rename rather than a version bump — budget for API changes in the code that uses it, not only the reference swap.
Deprecated: xunit Extensions/Tests/Revo.Extensions.History.Tests/Revo.Extensions.History.Tests.csproj:16 — xunit 2.9.3 — Legacy — the publisher's replacement is `xunit.v3`; that is the next major line under a new package id, so the move is a breaking rename rather than a version bump — budget for API changes in the code that uses it, not only the reference swap.
Deprecated: xunit Extensions/Tests/Revo.Extensions.Notifications.Tests/Revo.Extensions.Notifications.Tests.csproj:16 — xunit 2.9.3 — Legacy — the publisher's replacement is `xunit.v3`; that is the next major line under a new package id, so the move is a breaking rename rather than a version bump — budget for API changes in the code that uses it, not only the reference swap.
Deprecated: xunit Providers/AspNetCore/Tests/Revo.AspNetCore.Tests/Revo.AspNetCore.Tests.csproj:18 — xunit 2.9.3 — Legacy — the publisher's replacement is `xunit.v3`; that is the next major line under a new package id, so the move is a breaking rename rather than a version bump — budget for API changes in the code that uses it, not only the reference swap.
Deprecated: xunit Providers/EFCore/Tests/Revo.EFCore.Tests/Revo.EFCore.Tests.csproj:17 — xunit 2.9.3 — Legacy — the publisher's replacement is `xunit.v3`; that is the next major line under a new package id, so the move is a breaking rename rather than a version bump — budget for API changes in the code that uses it, not only the reference swap.
Deprecated: xunit Examples/Todos/Revo.Examples.Todos.Tests/Revo.Examples.Todos.Tests.csproj:16 — xunit 2.9.3 — Legacy — the publisher's replacement is `xunit.v3`; that is the next major line under a new package id, so the move is a breaking rename rather than a version bump — budget for API changes in the code that uses it, not only the reference swap.
Deprecated: xunit Providers/EasyNetQ/Tests/Revo.EasyNetQ.Tests/Revo.EasyNetQ.Tests.csproj:17 — xunit 2.9.3 — Legacy — the publisher's replacement is `xunit.v3`; that is the next major line under a new package id, so the move is a breaking rename rather than a version bump — budget for API changes in the code that uses it, not only the reference swap.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (5 lines × 2) · ×11

Duplicated block (5 lines × 2) Providers/EF6/Revo.EF6/DataAccess/Model/EntityTypeDiscovery.cs:60 — Providers/EF6/Revo.EF6/DataAccess/Model/EntityTypeDiscovery.cs:60-64 | Providers/EFCore/Revo.EFCore/DataAccess/Model/EntityTypeDiscovery.cs:58-62 — before extracting anything, compare `Providers/EF6/Revo.EF6/DataAccess/Model/EntityTypeDiscovery.cs` and `Providers/EFCore/Revo.EFCore/DataAccess/Model/EntityTypeDiscovery.cs` as WHOLE FILES: 91% of the shorter file's lines also appear in the other, so this reads as one file having been copied from the other rather than as a helper waiting to be extracted. The 2 duplicated block(s) this scan matched between them are fragments of that copy, not the extent of it — treat the file pair as the unit. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. Each matched range is the entire body of the declaration above it, so the region is already a complete unit: move that whole declaration to the shared location and have each site call it, rather than lifting the lines out of their bodies. Any `return` inside it is the body's own exit and keeps its meaning in the moved unit.
Duplicated block (5 lines × 2) Revo.Infrastructure/Repositories/IQueryableAggregateStore.cs:13 — Revo.Infrastructure/Repositories/IQueryableAggregateStore.cs:13-17 | Revo.Infrastructure/Repositories/IRepository.cs:18-22 — the copies sit in sibling files of one directory, so a shared home is within easy reach: extract the block into a single shared function the call sites can all reach — a file they already depend on, or a new one alongside them — and call it from both call sites, so a change lands once.
Duplicated block (5 lines × 2) Providers/RavenDB/Revo.RavenDB/DataAccess/RavenCrudRepository.cs:70 — Providers/RavenDB/Revo.RavenDB/DataAccess/RavenCrudRepository.cs:70-74 | Revo.DataAccess/InMemory/InMemoryCrudRepository.cs:61-65 — 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 (5 lines × 2) Providers/EF6/Revo.EF6/DataAccess/Entities/EF6CrudRepository.cs:35 — Providers/EF6/Revo.EF6/DataAccess/Entities/EF6CrudRepository.cs:35-39 | Providers/EFCore/Revo.EFCore/DataAccess/Entities/EFCoreCrudRepository.cs:37-41 — before extracting anything, compare `Providers/EF6/Revo.EF6/DataAccess/Entities/EF6CrudRepository.cs` and `Providers/EFCore/Revo.EFCore/DataAccess/Entities/EFCoreCrudRepository.cs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 16 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 174 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. Each matched range is the entire body of the declaration above it, so the region is already a complete unit: move that whole declaration to the shared location and have each site call it, rather than lifting the lines out of their bodies. Any `return` inside it is the body's own exit and keeps its meaning in the moved unit.
Duplicated block (5 lines × 2) Providers/EF6/Revo.EF6/DataAccess/Entities/EF6CrudRepository.cs:105 — Providers/EF6/Revo.EF6/DataAccess/Entities/EF6CrudRepository.cs:105-109 | Providers/EFCore/Revo.EFCore/DataAccess/Entities/EFCoreCrudRepository.cs:111-115 — before extracting anything, compare `Providers/EF6/Revo.EF6/DataAccess/Entities/EF6CrudRepository.cs` and `Providers/EFCore/Revo.EFCore/DataAccess/Entities/EFCoreCrudRepository.cs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 16 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 174 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. The matched lines also transfer control out of the body holding them, which cannot survive a move into a called unit unchanged: have the extracted unit return that decision and let each site act on it.
Duplicated block (5 lines × 2) Providers/EF6/Revo.EF6/DataAccess/Entities/EF6CrudRepository.cs:150 — Providers/EF6/Revo.EF6/DataAccess/Entities/EF6CrudRepository.cs:150-154 | Providers/EFCore/Revo.EFCore/DataAccess/Entities/EFCoreCrudRepository.cs:156-160 — before extracting anything, compare `Providers/EF6/Revo.EF6/DataAccess/Entities/EF6CrudRepository.cs` and `Providers/EFCore/Revo.EFCore/DataAccess/Entities/EFCoreCrudRepository.cs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 16 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 174 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. The matched lines also transfer control out of the body holding them, which cannot survive a move into a called unit unchanged: have the extracted unit return that decision and let each site act on it.
Duplicated block (5 lines × 2) Providers/EF6/Revo.EF6/DataAccess/Entities/EF6CrudRepository.cs:157 — Providers/EF6/Revo.EF6/DataAccess/Entities/EF6CrudRepository.cs:157-161 | Providers/EFCore/Revo.EFCore/DataAccess/Entities/EFCoreCrudRepository.cs:163-167 — before extracting anything, compare `Providers/EF6/Revo.EF6/DataAccess/Entities/EF6CrudRepository.cs` and `Providers/EFCore/Revo.EFCore/DataAccess/Entities/EFCoreCrudRepository.cs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 16 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 174 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. The matched lines also transfer control out of the body holding them, which cannot survive a move into a called unit unchanged: have the extracted unit return that decision and let each site act on it.
Duplicated block (5 lines × 2) Providers/EF6/Revo.EF6/DataAccess/Entities/EF6CrudRepository.cs:164 — Providers/EF6/Revo.EF6/DataAccess/Entities/EF6CrudRepository.cs:164-168 | Providers/EFCore/Revo.EFCore/DataAccess/Entities/EFCoreCrudRepository.cs:170-174 — before extracting anything, compare `Providers/EF6/Revo.EF6/DataAccess/Entities/EF6CrudRepository.cs` and `Providers/EFCore/Revo.EFCore/DataAccess/Entities/EFCoreCrudRepository.cs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 16 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 174 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. The matched lines also transfer control out of the body holding them, which cannot survive a move into a called unit unchanged: have the extracted unit return that decision and let each site act on it.
Duplicated block (5 lines × 2) Providers/EF6/Revo.EF6/DataAccess/Entities/EF6CrudRepository.cs:171 — Providers/EF6/Revo.EF6/DataAccess/Entities/EF6CrudRepository.cs:171-175 | Providers/EFCore/Revo.EFCore/DataAccess/Entities/EFCoreCrudRepository.cs:177-181 — before extracting anything, compare `Providers/EF6/Revo.EF6/DataAccess/Entities/EF6CrudRepository.cs` and `Providers/EFCore/Revo.EFCore/DataAccess/Entities/EFCoreCrudRepository.cs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 16 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 174 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. The matched lines also transfer control out of the body holding them, which cannot survive a move into a called unit unchanged: have the extracted unit return that decision and let each site act on it.
Duplicated block (5 lines × 2) Providers/EF6/Revo.EF6/DataAccess/Entities/EF6CrudRepository.cs:178 — Providers/EF6/Revo.EF6/DataAccess/Entities/EF6CrudRepository.cs:178-182 | Providers/EFCore/Revo.EFCore/DataAccess/Entities/EFCoreCrudRepository.cs:184-188 — before extracting anything, compare `Providers/EF6/Revo.EF6/DataAccess/Entities/EF6CrudRepository.cs` and `Providers/EFCore/Revo.EFCore/DataAccess/Entities/EFCoreCrudRepository.cs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 16 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 174 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. The matched lines also transfer control out of the body holding them, which cannot survive a move into a called unit unchanged: have the extracted unit return that decision and let each site act on it.
Duplicated block (5 lines × 2) Providers/EF6/Revo.EF6/DataAccess/Entities/EF6CrudRepository.cs:308 — Providers/EF6/Revo.EF6/DataAccess/Entities/EF6CrudRepository.cs:308-312 | Providers/EFCore/Revo.EFCore/DataAccess/Entities/EFCoreCrudRepository.cs:327-331 — before extracting anything, compare `Providers/EF6/Revo.EF6/DataAccess/Entities/EF6CrudRepository.cs` and `Providers/EFCore/Revo.EFCore/DataAccess/Entities/EFCoreCrudRepository.cs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 16 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 174 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. Each matched range is the entire body of the declaration above it, so the region is already a complete unit: move that whole declaration to the shared location and have each site call it, rather than lifting the lines out of their bodies. Any `return` inside it is the body's own exit and keeps its meaning in the moved unit.

PF3 · Async & latency hygiene · Sync-over-async blocking · ×11

Sync-over-async blocking — 10 blocking call(s) on async work (.Wait()/.GetAwaiter().GetResult()) — these waste a thread and can deadlock wherever a synchronization context is in play (a UI thread, or a caller that has one).
Sync-over-async blocking Extensions/Revo.Extensions.Notifications/Channels/Buffering/BufferedNotificationStartup.cs:20 — `.Wait()` blocks this thread until the async work completes — it wastes a thread-pool thread for as long as the work runs and can deadlock wherever a synchronization context is in play (a UI thread, or a caller that has one).
Sync-over-async blocking Revo.Infrastructure/DataAccess/DatabaseInitializerLoader.cs:72 — `.GetAwaiter().GetResult()` blocks this thread until the async work completes — it wastes a thread-pool thread for as long as the work runs and can deadlock wherever a synchronization context is in play (a UI thread, or a caller that has one).
Sync-over-async blocking Revo.Infrastructure/DataAccess/Migrations/DatabaseMigrationExecutionHook.cs:29 — `.Wait()` blocks this thread until the async work completes — it wastes a thread-pool thread for as long as the work runs and can deadlock wherever a synchronization context is in play (a UI thread, or a caller that has one).
Sync-over-async blocking Revo.Infrastructure/Events/Async/AsyncEventExecutionCatchUp.cs:38 — `.GetAwaiter().GetResult()` blocks this thread until the async work completes — it wastes a thread-pool thread for as long as the work runs and can deadlock wherever a synchronization context is in play (a UI thread, or a caller that has one).
Sync-over-async blocking Revo.Infrastructure/Jobs/InMemory/InMemoryJobSchedulerProcess.cs:30 — `.Wait()` blocks this thread until the async work completes — it wastes a thread-pool thread for as long as the work runs and can deadlock wherever a synchronization context is in play (a UI thread, or a caller that has one).
Sync-over-async blocking Revo.Infrastructure/Jobs/InMemory/InMemoryJobWorkerProcess.cs:36 — `.Wait()` blocks this thread until the async work completes — it wastes a thread-pool thread for as long as the work runs and can deadlock wherever a synchronization context is in play (a UI thread, or a caller that has one).
Sync-over-async blocking Revo.Infrastructure/Jobs/InMemory/InMemoryJobWorkerProcess.cs:69 — `throttle.Wait()` blocks this thread until the async work completes — it wastes a thread-pool thread for as long as the work runs and can deadlock wherever a synchronization context is in play (a UI thread, or a caller that has one).
Sync-over-async blocking Providers/EasyNetQ/Revo.EasyNetQ/BusInitializer.cs:42 — `.GetAwaiter().GetResult()` blocks this thread until the async work completes — it wastes a thread-pool thread for as long as the work runs and can deadlock wherever a synchronization context is in play (a UI thread, or a caller that has one).
Sync-over-async blocking Providers/EasyNetQ/Revo.EasyNetQ/BusInitializer.cs:47 — `.GetAwaiter().GetResult()` blocks this thread until the async work completes — it wastes a thread-pool thread for as long as the work runs and can deadlock wherever a synchronization context is in play (a UI thread, or a caller that has one).
Sync-over-async blocking Providers/EasyNetQ/Revo.EasyNetQ/EasyNetQBlockingSubscriptionHandler.cs:23 — `.GetAwaiter().GetResult()` blocks this thread until the async work completes — it wastes a thread-pool thread for as long as the work runs and can deadlock wherever a synchronization context is in play (a UI thread, or a caller that has one).

AX4 · Dependency direction · Dependency-rule violation · ×10

Dependency-rule violation: Revo.Domain (Domain) → Revo.DataAccess (Infrastructure) Revo.Domain/Dto/EntityDto.cs:2 — This Domain file depends on the Infrastructure project `Revo.DataAccess`: it names `Revo.DataAccess.Entities`, `IHasId`. The inward dependency rule is broken here. It is named again on line 6. Depend on an abstraction the inner layer owns, implemented in the outer one.
Dependency-rule violation: Revo.Domain (Domain) → Revo.DataAccess (Infrastructure) Revo.Domain/Entities/Basic/BasicAggregateRoot.cs:2 — This Domain file depends on the Infrastructure project `Revo.DataAccess`: it names `Revo.DataAccess.Entities`, `DatabaseEntityAttribute`, `IRowVersioned`. The inward dependency rule is broken here. It is named again on lines 11, 12. Depend on an abstraction the inner layer owns, implemented in the outer one.
Dependency-rule violation: Revo.Domain (Domain) → Revo.DataAccess (Infrastructure) Revo.Domain/Entities/Basic/BasicClassAggregateRoot.cs:2 — This Domain file depends on the Infrastructure project `Revo.DataAccess`: it names `Revo.DataAccess.Entities`, `IHasClassId`. The inward dependency rule is broken here. It is named again on line 6. Depend on an abstraction the inner layer owns, implemented in the outer one.
Dependency-rule violation: Revo.Domain (Domain) → Revo.DataAccess (Infrastructure) Revo.Domain/Entities/Basic/BasicClassEntity.cs:2 — This Domain file depends on the Infrastructure project `Revo.DataAccess`: it names `Revo.DataAccess.Entities`, `IHasClassId`. The inward dependency rule is broken here. It is named again on line 10. Depend on an abstraction the inner layer owns, implemented in the outer one.
Dependency-rule violation: Revo.Domain (Domain) → Revo.DataAccess (Infrastructure) Revo.Domain/Entities/Basic/BasicEntity.cs:2 — This Domain file depends on the Infrastructure project `Revo.DataAccess`: it names `Revo.DataAccess.Entities`, `DatabaseEntityAttribute`, `IRowVersioned`. The inward dependency rule is broken here. It is named again on lines 9, 10. Depend on an abstraction the inner layer owns, implemented in the outer one.
Dependency-rule violation: Revo.Domain (Domain) → Revo.DataAccess (Infrastructure) Revo.Domain/Entities/IEntity.cs:2 — This Domain file depends on the Infrastructure project `Revo.DataAccess`: it names `Revo.DataAccess.Entities`, `IHasId`. The inward dependency rule is broken here. It is named again on line 9. Depend on an abstraction the inner layer owns, implemented in the outer one.
Dependency-rule violation: Revo.Domain (Domain) → Revo.DataAccess (Infrastructure) Revo.Domain/ReadModel/EntityReadModel.cs:2 — This Domain file depends on the Infrastructure project `Revo.DataAccess`: it names `Revo.DataAccess.Entities`, `IManuallyRowVersioned`. The inward dependency rule is broken here. It is named again on line 6. Depend on an abstraction the inner layer owns, implemented in the outer one.
Dependency-rule violation: Revo.Domain (Domain) → Revo.DataAccess (Infrastructure) Revo.Domain/ReadModel/EntityView.cs:2 — This Domain file depends on the Infrastructure project `Revo.DataAccess`: it names `Revo.DataAccess.Entities`, `DatabaseEntityAttribute`, `IHasId`. The inward dependency rule is broken here. It is named again on lines 6, 7. Depend on an abstraction the inner layer owns, implemented in the outer one.
Dependency-rule violation: Revo.Domain (Domain) → Revo.DataAccess (Infrastructure) Revo.Domain/ReadModel/IEntityReadModel.cs:2 — This Domain file depends on the Infrastructure project `Revo.DataAccess`: it names `Revo.DataAccess.Entities`, `IHasId`. The inward dependency rule is broken here. It is named again on line 6. Depend on an abstraction the inner layer owns, implemented in the outer one.
Dependency-rule violation: Revo.Domain (Domain) → Revo.DataAccess (Infrastructure) Revo.Domain/ReadModel/ReadModelBase.cs:1 — This Domain file depends on the Infrastructure project `Revo.DataAccess`: it names `Revo.DataAccess.Entities`, `DatabaseEntityAttribute`. The inward dependency rule is broken here. It is named again on line 5. Depend on an abstraction the inner layer owns, implemented in the outer one.

D23 · Boundary Type-Coupling · Cross-context type EntityState (Revo → Providers) · ×9

Cross-context type EntityState (Revo → Providers) Providers/EF6/Revo.EF6/DataAccess/Entities/EF6CrudRepository.cs:331 — EntityState (context Revo) is exposed in Providers's public surface via EF6CrudRepository.GetEntities — couples the contexts.
Cross-context type EntityState (Revo → Providers) Providers/EF6/Revo.EF6/DataAccess/Entities/EF6CrudRepository.cs:345 — EntityState (context Revo) is exposed in Providers's public surface via EF6CrudRepository.GetEntityState — couples the contexts.
Cross-context type EntityState (Revo → Providers) Providers/EF6/Revo.EF6/DataAccess/Entities/EF6CrudRepository.cs:350 — EntityState (context Revo) is exposed in Providers's public surface via EF6CrudRepository.SetEntityState — couples the contexts.
Cross-context type EntityState (Revo → Providers) Providers/RavenDB/Revo.RavenDB/DataAccess/RavenCrudRepository.cs:186 — EntityState (context Revo) is exposed in Providers's public surface via RavenCrudRepository.GetEntities — couples the contexts.
Cross-context type EntityState (Revo → Providers) Providers/RavenDB/Revo.RavenDB/DataAccess/RavenCrudRepository.cs:191 — EntityState (context Revo) is exposed in Providers's public surface via RavenCrudRepository.GetEntityState — couples the contexts.
Cross-context type EntityState (Revo → Providers) Providers/RavenDB/Revo.RavenDB/DataAccess/RavenCrudRepository.cs:196 — EntityState (context Revo) is exposed in Providers's public surface via RavenCrudRepository.SetEntityState — couples the contexts.
Cross-context type EntityState (Revo → Providers) Providers/EFCore/Revo.EFCore/DataAccess/Entities/EFCoreCrudRepository.cs:349 — EntityState (context Revo) is exposed in Providers's public surface via EFCoreCrudRepository.GetEntities — couples the contexts.
Cross-context type EntityState (Revo → Providers) Providers/EFCore/Revo.EFCore/DataAccess/Entities/EFCoreCrudRepository.cs:362 — EntityState (context Revo) is exposed in Providers's public surface via EFCoreCrudRepository.GetEntityState — couples the contexts.
Cross-context type EntityState (Revo → Providers) Providers/EFCore/Revo.EFCore/DataAccess/Entities/EFCoreCrudRepository.cs:367 — EntityState (context Revo) is exposed in Providers's public surface via EFCoreCrudRepository.SetEntityState — couples the contexts.

X1 · Async correctness · Sync-over-async (deadlock risk) · ×6

Sync-over-async (deadlock risk) Extensions/Revo.Extensions.Notifications/Channels/Buffering/BufferedNotificationStartup.cs:20 — Blocking on a Task with `.Wait()`/`.GetAwaiter().GetResult()` can deadlock (and wastes a thread). Prefer awaiting it: make the caller `async` and `await` instead. Where a synchronous entry point must stay — a public sync API you cannot break, or a process entry point that must not return until the work finishes — the block belongs in ONE documented bridge and never inside code that is already async; and where it already is that bridge, give the wait a TIMEOUT so a hung task fails the call instead of hanging the process.
Sync-over-async (deadlock risk) Revo.Infrastructure/DataAccess/Migrations/DatabaseMigrationExecutionHook.cs:28 — Blocking on a Task with `.Wait()`/`.GetAwaiter().GetResult()` can deadlock (and wastes a thread). Prefer awaiting it: make the caller `async` and `await` instead. Where a synchronous entry point must stay — a public sync API you cannot break, or a process entry point that must not return until the work finishes — the block belongs in ONE documented bridge and never inside code that is already async; and where it already is that bridge, give the wait a TIMEOUT so a hung task fails the call instead of hanging the process.
Sync-over-async (deadlock risk) Revo.Infrastructure/Events/Async/AsyncEventExecutionCatchUp.cs:38 — Blocking on a Task with `.Wait()`/`.GetAwaiter().GetResult()` can deadlock (and wastes a thread). Prefer awaiting it: make the caller `async` and `await` instead. Where a synchronous entry point must stay — a public sync API you cannot break, or a process entry point that must not return until the work finishes — the block belongs in ONE documented bridge and never inside code that is already async; and where it already is that bridge, give the wait a TIMEOUT so a hung task fails the call instead of hanging the process.
Sync-over-async (deadlock risk) Providers/EasyNetQ/Revo.EasyNetQ/BusInitializer.cs:42 — Blocking on a Task with `.Wait()`/`.GetAwaiter().GetResult()` can deadlock (and wastes a thread). Prefer awaiting it: make the caller `async` and `await` instead. Where a synchronous entry point must stay — a public sync API you cannot break, or a process entry point that must not return until the work finishes — the block belongs in ONE documented bridge and never inside code that is already async; and where it already is that bridge, give the wait a TIMEOUT so a hung task fails the call instead of hanging the process.
Sync-over-async (deadlock risk) Providers/EasyNetQ/Revo.EasyNetQ/BusInitializer.cs:47 — Blocking on a Task with `.Wait()`/`.GetAwaiter().GetResult()` can deadlock (and wastes a thread). Prefer awaiting it: make the caller `async` and `await` instead. Where a synchronous entry point must stay — a public sync API you cannot break, or a process entry point that must not return until the work finishes — the block belongs in ONE documented bridge and never inside code that is already async; and where it already is that bridge, give the wait a TIMEOUT so a hung task fails the call instead of hanging the process.
Sync-over-async (deadlock risk) Providers/EasyNetQ/Revo.EasyNetQ/EasyNetQBlockingSubscriptionHandler.cs:20 — Blocking on a Task with `.Wait()`/`.GetAwaiter().GetResult()` can deadlock (and wastes a thread). Prefer awaiting it: make the caller `async` and `await` instead. Where a synchronous entry point must stay — a public sync API you cannot break, or a process entry point that must not return until the work finishes — the block belongs in ONE documented bridge and never inside code that is already async; and where it already is that bridge, give the wait a TIMEOUT so a hung task fails the call instead of hanging the process.

D17 · Explicit Debt · CommentedOutCode · ×5

CommentedOutCode Extensions/Revo.Extensions.History/ChangeTracking/EntityAttributeChangeLogger.cs:53 — 13 consecutive commented-code lines
CommentedOutCode Extensions/Revo.Extensions.History/ChangeTracking/Model/EntityAttributeData.cs:66 — 8 consecutive commented-code lines
CommentedOutCode Providers/EF6/Revo.EF6/DataAccess/Model/CustomStoreConvention.cs:252 — 4 consecutive commented-code lines
CommentedOutCode Revo.Infrastructure/Events/Async/AsyncEventSequencer.cs:20 — 4 consecutive commented-code lines
CommentedOutCode Providers/EF6/Revo.EF6/DataAccess/Model/CustomStoreConvention.cs:257 — 7 consecutive commented-code lines

D3 · God Classes · TooManyMethods · ×5

TooManyMethods: EF6CrudRepository Providers/EF6/Revo.EF6/DataAccess/Entities/EF6CrudRepository.cs — TooManyMethods — 284 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded), 71 methods. The bar is 30 methods; this is 41 over it, 2.37× the bar. To reduce it, group the members that share the same data into a smaller type of their own and delegate to it, so no single type carries every responsibility.
TooManyMethods: EFCoreCrudRepository Providers/EFCore/Revo.EFCore/DataAccess/Entities/EFCoreCrudRepository.cs — TooManyMethods — 315 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded), 69 methods. The bar is 30 methods; this is 39 over it, 2.30× the bar. To reduce it, group the members that share the same data into a smaller type of their own and delegate to it, so no single type carries every responsibility.
TooManyMethods: InMemoryCrudRepository Revo.DataAccess/InMemory/InMemoryCrudRepository.cs — TooManyMethods — 163 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded), 61 methods. The bar is 30 methods; this is 31 over it, 2.03× the bar. To reduce it, group the members that share the same data into a smaller type of their own and delegate to it, so no single type carries every responsibility.
TooManyMethods: RavenCrudRepository Providers/RavenDB/Revo.RavenDB/DataAccess/RavenCrudRepository.cs — TooManyMethods — 147 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded), 58 methods. The bar is 30 methods; this is 28 over it, 1.93× the bar. To reduce it, group the members that share the same data into a smaller type of their own and delegate to it, so no single type carries every responsibility.
TooManyMethods: EventStore Revo.Infrastructure/EventStores/Generic/EventStore.cs — TooManyMethods — 199 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded), 31 methods. The bar is 30 methods; this is 1 over it, 1.03× the bar. To reduce it, group the members that share the same data into a smaller type of their own and delegate to it, so no single type carries every responsibility.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (8 lines × 2) · ×3

Duplicated block (8 lines × 2) Providers/EF6/Revo.EF6/DataAccess/Entities/EF6CrudRepository.cs:218 — Providers/EF6/Revo.EF6/DataAccess/Entities/EF6CrudRepository.cs:218-225 | Providers/EFCore/Revo.EFCore/DataAccess/Entities/EFCoreCrudRepository.cs:225-232 — before extracting anything, compare `Providers/EF6/Revo.EF6/DataAccess/Entities/EF6CrudRepository.cs` and `Providers/EFCore/Revo.EFCore/DataAccess/Entities/EFCoreCrudRepository.cs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 16 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 174 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. Each matched range is the entire body of the declaration above it, so the region is already a complete unit: move that whole declaration to the shared location and have each site call it, rather than lifting the lines out of their bodies. Any `return` inside it is the body's own exit and keeps its meaning in the moved unit.
Duplicated block (8 lines × 2) Revo.Infrastructure/DataAccess/Migrations/Providers/PgsqlMigrationScripter.cs:7 — Revo.Infrastructure/DataAccess/Migrations/Providers/PgsqlMigrationScripter.cs:7-14 | REDACTED:7-14 — before extracting anything, compare `Revo.Infrastructure/DataAccess/Migrations/Providers/PgsqlMigrationScripter.cs` and `REDACTED` as WHOLE FILES: 84% of the shorter file's lines also appear in the other, so this reads as one file having been copied from the other rather than as a helper waiting to be extracted. The 1 duplicated block(s) this scan matched between them are fragments of that copy, not the extent of it — treat the file pair as the unit. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. Each matched range is the entire body of the declaration above it, so the region is already a complete unit: move that whole declaration to the shared location and have each site call it, rather than lifting the lines out of their bodies. Any `return` inside it is the body's own exit and keeps its meaning in the moved unit.
Duplicated block (8 lines × 2) Providers/EFCore/Revo.EFCore/DataAccess/Conventions/SnakeCaseColumnNamesConvention.cs:40 — Providers/EFCore/Revo.EFCore/DataAccess/Conventions/SnakeCaseColumnNamesConvention.cs:40-47 | Providers/EFCore/Revo.EFCore/DataAccess/Conventions/SnakeCaseTableNamesConvention.cs:24-31 — the copies sit in sibling files of one directory, so a shared home is within easy reach: extract the block into a single shared function the call sites can all reach — a file they already depend on, or a new one alongside them — and call it from both call sites, so a change lands once. Each matched range is the entire body of the declaration above it, so the region is already a complete unit: move that whole declaration to the shared location and have each site call it, rather than lifting the lines out of their bodies. Any `return` inside it is the body's own exit and keeps its meaning in the moved unit.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (6 lines × 2) · ×3

Duplicated block (6 lines × 2) Providers/EF6/Revo.EF6/DataAccess/Entities/EF6CrudRepository.cs:324 — Providers/EF6/Revo.EF6/DataAccess/Entities/EF6CrudRepository.cs:324-329 | Providers/EFCore/Revo.EFCore/DataAccess/Entities/EFCoreCrudRepository.cs:342-347 — before extracting anything, compare `Providers/EF6/Revo.EF6/DataAccess/Entities/EF6CrudRepository.cs` and `Providers/EFCore/Revo.EFCore/DataAccess/Entities/EFCoreCrudRepository.cs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 16 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 174 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `Providers/EF6/Revo.EF6/DataAccess/Entities/EF6CrudRepository.cs:324` it begins part-way through the construct above it, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that.
Duplicated block (6 lines × 2) Revo.Core/Configuration/KernelBootstrapper.cs:79 — Revo.Core/Configuration/KernelBootstrapper.cs:79-84 | Tools/Revo.Tools.DatabaseMigrator/DatabaseMigrator.cs:161-166 — 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. Each matched range is the entire body of the declaration above it, so the region is already a complete unit: move that whole declaration to the shared location and have each site call it, rather than lifting the lines out of their bodies. Any `return` inside it is the body's own exit and keeps its meaning in the moved unit.
Duplicated block (6 lines × 2) Revo.Domain/Sagas/BasicSaga.cs:34 — Revo.Domain/Sagas/BasicSaga.cs:34-39 | Revo.Domain/Sagas/EventSourcedSaga.cs:36-41 — the copies sit in sibling files of one directory, so a shared home is within easy reach: extract the block into a single shared function the call sites can all reach — a file they already depend on, or a new one alongside them — and call it from both call sites, so a change lands once. Each matched range is the entire body of the declaration above it, so the region is already a complete unit: move that whole declaration to the shared location and have each site call it, rather than lifting the lines out of their bodies. Any `return` inside it is the body's own exit and keeps its meaning in the moved unit.

ED5 · Idempotency · Non-idempotent mutation · ×3

Non-idempotent mutation: Handlers.TodoListCommandHandler.HandleAsync Examples/Todos/Revo.Examples.Todos/Handlers/TodoListCommandHandler.cs:30 — `Handlers.TodoListCommandHandler.HandleAsync` mutates persistent state (a repository write) with no idempotency guard, and the model confirms a re-run would double-apply it. A retry or at-least-once redelivery means it can run twice — add an exists/dedup check, an upsert, an idempotency-key/inbox, or a versioned write.
Non-idempotent mutation: EasyNetQ.EasyNetQBlockingSubscriptionHandler.HandleMessage Providers/EasyNetQ/Revo.EasyNetQ/EasyNetQBlockingSubscriptionHandler.cs:16 — `EasyNetQ.EasyNetQBlockingSubscriptionHandler.HandleMessage` mutates persistent state (an event publish) with no idempotency guard, and the model confirms a re-run would double-apply it. A retry or at-least-once redelivery means it can run twice — add an exists/dedup check, an upsert, an idempotency-key/inbox, or a versioned write.
Non-idempotent mutation: EasyNetQ.EasyNetQSubscriptionHandler.HandleMessageAsync Providers/EasyNetQ/Revo.EasyNetQ/EasyNetQSubscriptionHandler.cs:16 — `EasyNetQ.EasyNetQSubscriptionHandler.HandleMessageAsync` mutates persistent state (an event publish) with no idempotency guard, and the model confirms a re-run would double-apply it. A retry or at-least-once redelivery means it can run twice — add an exists/dedup check, an upsert, an idempotency-key/inbox, or a versioned write.

X18 · Disposal-pattern correctness · Disposes a dependency it does not own · ×3

Disposes a dependency it does not own Revo.Core/Collections/MultiValueDictionary.cs:190 — `enumerator` is never created by `Enumerator` — every assignment to it takes a constructor parameter — yet this type disposes it here (line 190). Its declared type `IEnumerator` is an interface, so the instance came from whoever resolved it, and that owner decides when it ends. Disposing it from here reaches outside this object's lifetime: a dependency shared with the rest of the process is torn down when THIS instance goes away, and the real owner's later `Dispose()` runs a second time on an object already disposed. Drop the call — a type disposes what it constructed, and only that. If this dependency genuinely is exclusive to this instance, construct it here (or take an owned factory) so the ownership is stated in the code rather than assumed.
Disposes a dependency it does not own Revo.Infrastructure/DataAccess/Migrations/Providers/AdoNetDatabaseMigrationProvider.cs:28 — `DbConnection` is never created by `AdoNetDatabaseMigrationProvider` — every assignment to it takes a constructor parameter — yet this type disposes it here (line 28). Its declared type `IDbConnection` is an interface, so the instance came from whoever resolved it, and that owner decides when it ends. Disposing it from here reaches outside this object's lifetime: a dependency shared with the rest of the process is torn down when THIS instance goes away, and the real owner's later `Dispose()` runs a second time on an object already disposed. Drop the call — a type disposes what it constructed, and only that. If this dependency genuinely is exclusive to this instance, construct it here (or take an owned factory) so the ownership is stated in the code rather than assumed.
Disposes a dependency it does not own Providers/EF6/Revo.EF6/DataAccess/InMemory/LocalDbAsyncEnumerator.cs:19 — `inner` is never created by `LocalDbAsyncEnumerator` — every assignment to it takes a constructor parameter — yet this type disposes it here (line 19). Its declared type `IEnumerator` is an interface, so the instance came from whoever resolved it, and that owner decides when it ends. Disposing it from here reaches outside this object's lifetime: a dependency shared with the rest of the process is torn down when THIS instance goes away, and the real owner's later `Dispose()` runs a second time on an object already disposed. Drop the call — a type disposes what it constructed, and only that. If this dependency genuinely is exclusive to this instance, construct it here (or take an owned factory) so the ownership is stated in the code rather than assumed.

D10 · Test Quality · No assertions · ×2

No assertions: ThrowsIfHeaderVersionDifferentFromFileName Tests/Revo.Infrastructure.Tests/DataAccess/Migrations/FileSqlDatabaseMigrationTests.cs:97 — This method's body runs code, and no assertion call was recognised in it. Recognised by name: Assert*, *Should*/ShouldBe*, Verify, Expect, Throws, Record, Received/DidNotReceive, MustHaveHappened/MustNotHaveHappened, EnsureSuccessStatusCode and *AndEnsure* — so verification routed through a helper of your own naming, through a base-class or callback object whose members hold the assertions, or through a harness that fails by throwing under some other name, is not visible to this check and is not counted here. Read it as 'no assertion this check knows how to see', and if that is right, add one.
No assertions: EntersAndExits Tests/Revo.Infrastructure.Tests/Events/Async/AsyncEventWorkerLockCacheTests.cs:13 — This method's body runs code, and no assertion call was recognised in it. Recognised by name: Assert*, *Should*/ShouldBe*, Verify, Expect, Throws, Record, Received/DidNotReceive, MustHaveHappened/MustNotHaveHappened, EnsureSuccessStatusCode and *AndEnsure* — so verification routed through a helper of your own naming, through a base-class or callback object whose members hold the assertions, or through a harness that fails by throwing under some other name, is not visible to this check and is not counted here. Read it as 'no assertion this check knows how to see', and if that is right, add one.

D23 · Boundary Type-Coupling · Cross-context type IAggregateStore (Revo → Providers) · ×2

Cross-context type IAggregateStore (Revo → Providers) Providers/EFCore/Revo.EFCore/Repositories/EFCoreCrudAggregateStoreFactory.cs:28 — IAggregateStore (context Revo) is exposed in Providers's public surface via EFCoreCrudAggregateStoreFactory.CreateAggregateStore — couples the contexts.
Cross-context type IAggregateStore (Revo → Providers) Providers/EFCore/Revo.EFCore/Repositories/EFCoreEventSourcedAggregateStoreFactory.cs:21 — IAggregateStore (context Revo) is exposed in Providers's public surface via EFCoreEventSourcedAggregateStoreFactory.CreateAggregateStore — couples the contexts.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (33–36 lines × 2) · ×2

Duplicated block (33–36 lines × 2) Providers/EF6/Revo.EF6/DataAccess/Entities/EF6CrudRepository.cs:379 — Providers/EF6/Revo.EF6/DataAccess/Entities/EF6CrudRepository.cs:379-411 | Providers/EFCore/Revo.EFCore/DataAccess/Entities/EFCoreCrudRepository.cs:400-435 — before extracting anything, compare `Providers/EF6/Revo.EF6/DataAccess/Entities/EF6CrudRepository.cs` and `Providers/EFCore/Revo.EFCore/DataAccess/Entities/EFCoreCrudRepository.cs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 16 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 174 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.
Duplicated block (33–36 lines × 2) Providers/EF6/Revo.EF6/DataAccess/Entities/EF6CrudRepository.cs:414 — Providers/EF6/Revo.EF6/DataAccess/Entities/EF6CrudRepository.cs:414-446 | Providers/EFCore/Revo.EFCore/DataAccess/Entities/EFCoreCrudRepository.cs:438-473 — before extracting anything, compare `Providers/EF6/Revo.EF6/DataAccess/Entities/EF6CrudRepository.cs` and `Providers/EFCore/Revo.EFCore/DataAccess/Entities/EFCoreCrudRepository.cs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 16 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 174 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (18 lines × 2) · ×2

Duplicated block (18 lines × 2) Revo.Infrastructure/Projections/EntityEventProjector.cs:134 — Revo.Infrastructure/Projections/EntityEventProjector.cs:134-151 | Revo.Infrastructure/Projections/EntityEventToPocoProjector.cs:173-190 — 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 `Revo.Infrastructure/Projections/EntityEventProjector.cs:134` it begins part-way through the construct above it, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just before the matched lines, `Revo.Infrastructure/Projections/EntityEventToPocoProjector.cs:171` calls `GetParameters`, `IsAssignableFrom` and `Revo.Infrastructure/Projections/EntityEventProjector.cs:132` does not — after which the two agree again for 3 more lines. One of those two behaviours is the intended one and the other is what a copy-paste left behind, so decide which BEFORE unifying them: extracting the shared part will silently settle it, and if the copy that skips the call is the wrong one, that bug is already live.
Duplicated block (18 lines × 2) Providers/EF6/Revo.EF6/DataAccess/Entities/RequestDbContextCache.cs:42 — Providers/EF6/Revo.EF6/DataAccess/Entities/RequestDbContextCache.cs:42-59 | Providers/EFCore/Revo.EFCore/DataAccess/Entities/RequestDbContextCache.cs:42-59 — before extracting anything, compare `Providers/EF6/Revo.EF6/DataAccess/Entities/RequestDbContextCache.cs` and `Providers/EFCore/Revo.EFCore/DataAccess/Entities/RequestDbContextCache.cs` as WHOLE FILES: 89% of the shorter file's lines also appear in the other, so this reads as one file having been copied from the other rather than as a helper waiting to be extracted. The 1 duplicated block(s) this scan matched between them are fragments of that copy, not the extent of it — treat the file pair as the unit. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. Each matched range is the entire body of the declaration above it, so the region is already a complete unit: move that whole declaration to the shared location and have each site call it, rather than lifting the lines out of their bodies. Any `return` inside it is the body's own exit and keeps its meaning in the moved unit.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (5 lines × 3) · ×2

Duplicated block (5 lines × 3) Providers/EF6/Revo.EF6/DataAccess/Entities/EF6CrudRepository.cs:112 — Providers/EF6/Revo.EF6/DataAccess/Entities/EF6CrudRepository.cs:112-116 | Providers/EFCore/Revo.EFCore/DataAccess/Entities/EFCoreCrudRepository.cs:118-122 | Providers/RavenDB/Revo.RavenDB/DataAccess/RavenCrudRepository.cs:77-81 — before extracting anything, compare `Providers/EF6/Revo.EF6/DataAccess/Entities/EF6CrudRepository.cs` and `Providers/EFCore/Revo.EFCore/DataAccess/Entities/EFCoreCrudRepository.cs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 16 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 174 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. The matched lines also transfer control out of the body holding them, which cannot survive a move into a called unit unchanged: have the extracted unit return that decision and let each site act on it.
Duplicated block (5 lines × 3) Providers/EF6/Revo.EF6/DataAccess/Entities/EF6CrudRepository.cs:119 — Providers/EF6/Revo.EF6/DataAccess/Entities/EF6CrudRepository.cs:119-123 | Providers/EFCore/Revo.EFCore/DataAccess/Entities/EFCoreCrudRepository.cs:125-129 | Providers/RavenDB/Revo.RavenDB/DataAccess/RavenCrudRepository.cs:84-88 — before extracting anything, compare `Providers/EF6/Revo.EF6/DataAccess/Entities/EF6CrudRepository.cs` and `Providers/EFCore/Revo.EFCore/DataAccess/Entities/EFCoreCrudRepository.cs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 16 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 174 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. 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.

D8 · Code Coverage · CRAP 90 · ×2

CRAP 90: PrivateCollectionMapping.MapPrivateCollections Providers/EF6/Revo.EF6/DataAccess/Model/PrivateCollectionMapping.cs:19 — Cyclomatic 9 with 0.0% file coverage — too complex for how untested it is (CRAP = CC²·(1−cov)³ + CC; ≥30 needs tests or simplification).
CRAP 90: EFCoreCoordinatedTransaction.DoCommitAsync Providers/EFCore/Revo.EFCore/Repositories/EFCoreCoordinatedTransaction.cs:29 — Cyclomatic 9 with 0.0% file coverage — too complex for how untested it is (CRAP = CC²·(1−cov)³ + CC; ≥30 needs tests or simplification).

D8 · Code Coverage · CRAP 72 · ×2

CRAP 72: PrefixConvention.PrefixColumnNames Providers/EFCore/Revo.EFCore/DataAccess/Conventions/PrefixConvention.cs:51 — Cyclomatic 8 with 0.0% file coverage — too complex for how untested it is (CRAP = CC²·(1−cov)³ + CC; ≥30 needs tests or simplification).
CRAP 72: PermissionTypeIndexer.RegisterCatalog Revo.Core/Security/PermissionTypeIndexer.cs:55 — Cyclomatic 8 with 0.0% file coverage — too complex for how untested it is (CRAP = CC²·(1−cov)³ + CC; ≥30 needs tests or simplification).

D8 · Code Coverage · CRAP 56 · ×2

CRAP 56: CustomStoreConvention.ConfigureTableType Providers/EF6/Revo.EF6/DataAccess/Model/CustomStoreConvention.cs:77 — Cyclomatic 7 with 0.0% file coverage — too complex for how untested it is (CRAP = CC²·(1−cov)³ + CC; ≥30 needs tests or simplification).
CRAP 56: LowerCaseConvention.Finalize Providers/EFCore/Revo.EFCore/DataAccess/Conventions/LowerCaseConvention.cs:11 — Cyclomatic 7 with 0.0% file coverage — too complex for how untested it is (CRAP = CC²·(1−cov)³ + CC; ≥30 needs tests or simplification).

X18 · Disposal-pattern correctness · Disposable created and abandoned in the method that made it · ×2

Disposable created and abandoned in the method that made it Tools/Revo.Tools.DatabaseMigrator/Program.cs:36 — `migrator` is a `DatabaseMigrator`, which implements `IDisposable`, and it is created here (line 36). Every use of it in `Upgrade` reads a member through it — it is never returned, never stored, never handed to anything else, and never disposed — so this method both creates the value and is the last thing that can release it, and does not. Nothing announces the leak: the object holds its resource until finalization if its type has a finalizer, and until the process ends if it does not, so the cost accumulates once per CALL rather than showing up as a failure. Declare it with `using` (`using var migrator = …;`), which releases it at the end of the scope on every path including a throw.
Disposable created and abandoned in the method that made it Tools/Revo.Tools.DatabaseMigrator/Program.cs:46 — `migrator` is a `DatabaseMigrator`, which implements `IDisposable`, and it is created here (line 46). Every use of it in `Preview` reads a member through it — it is never returned, never stored, never handed to anything else, and never disposed — so this method both creates the value and is the last thing that can release it, and does not. Nothing announces the leak: the object holds its resource until finalization if its type has a finalizer, and until the process ends if it does not, so the cost accumulates once per CALL rather than showing up as a failure. Declare it with `using` (`using var migrator = …;`), which releases it at the end of the scope on every path including a throw.

X3 · Exception handling · Swallowed exception (caught, then discarded) · ×2

Swallowed exception (caught, then discarded) Revo.Infrastructure/Jobs/InMemory/InMemoryJobSchedulerProcess.cs:62 — `catch (InvalidOperationException)` does nothing with the exception it caught — the body neither logs it, rethrows it, nor even names it, so the failure is discarded as completely as by an empty catch. Log it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems, or let it propagate; if one specific failure genuinely cannot matter, catch exactly that exception type and say why in a comment on the catch.
Swallowed exception (caught, then discarded) Revo.Infrastructure/Jobs/InMemory/InMemoryJobWorkerProcess.cs:64 — `catch (InvalidOperationException)` does nothing with the exception it caught — the body neither logs it, rethrows it, nor even names it, so the failure is discarded as completely as by an empty catch. Log it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems, or let it propagate; if one specific failure genuinely cannot matter, catch exactly that exception type and say why in a comment on the catch.

D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · DatabaseMigrationSelector.SelectModuleMigrationsNoDependenciesAsync (cyclomatic 34) · ×1

DatabaseMigrationSelector.SelectModuleMigrationsNoDependenciesAsync (cyclomatic 34) Revo.Infrastructure/DataAccess/Migrations/DatabaseMigrationSelector.cs:171 — DatabaseMigrationSelector.SelectModuleMigrationsNoDependenciesAsync has cyclomatic complexity 34 (threshold 15). Of this number, 32 points are the body's own statements and 2 belong to 2 function literals inside it that branch. 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 · EntityEventToPocoProjector.ProjectEventsAsync (cyclomatic 16) · ×1

EntityEventToPocoProjector.ProjectEventsAsync (cyclomatic 16) Revo.Infrastructure/Projections/EntityEventToPocoProjector.cs:46 — EntityEventToPocoProjector.ProjectEventsAsync has cyclomatic complexity 16 (threshold 15). Of this number, 13 points are the body's own statements and 3 belong to 2 function literals inside it that branch. 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.

D10 · Test Quality · Fixed-sleep synchronisation · ×1

Fixed-sleep synchronisation: EnterIsBlockingWithTwoThreads Tests/Revo.Infrastructure.Tests/Events/Async/AsyncEventWorkerLockCacheTests.cs:21 — This test starts a background task and then orders itself against it with `Thread.Sleep(100)` — a fixed wait, not a signal that the work is done. Whether it passes depends on how loaded the machine is, which is why a test written this way is green on a developer's box and random in CI. Wait for the event itself instead: the process's own exit or output, a completion handle, or a condition polled to a timeout.

D17 · Explicit Debt · BareSuppressMessage · ×1

BareSuppressMessage Providers/EFCore/Revo.EFCore/DataAccess/Query/CustomQueryProvider.cs:6 — System.Diagnostics.CodeAnalysis.SuppressMessage — the suppression records no reason: either it carries no justification argument at all, or one that states nothing a reader can weigh ("OK", "By design"). A suppression is a decision somebody made, and without the reason the next reader cannot tell a considered exception from an unexamined one, so it is never revisited. Write what makes this site legitimately different — the invariant that holds, the framework contract that forces the shape — or remove the suppression and fix what it hides.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · DatabaseMigrationSelector.SelectModuleMigrationsNoDependenciesAsync (cognitive 56) · ×1

DatabaseMigrationSelector.SelectModuleMigrationsNoDependenciesAsync (cognitive 56) Revo.Infrastructure/DataAccess/Migrations/DatabaseMigrationSelector.cs:171 — DatabaseMigrationSelector.SelectModuleMigrationsNoDependenciesAsync has cognitive complexity 56 (threshold 15). Of this number, 54 points are the body's own statements and 2 belong to 2 function literals inside it that branch. 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 · DatabaseMigrationRegistry.ValidateMigrations (cognitive 31) · ×1

DatabaseMigrationRegistry.ValidateMigrations (cognitive 31) Revo.Infrastructure/DataAccess/Migrations/DatabaseMigrationRegistry.cs:37 — DatabaseMigrationRegistry.ValidateMigrations has cognitive complexity 31 (threshold 15). Of this number, 29 points are the body's own statements and 2 belong to 2 function literals inside it that branch. 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 · AdoNetStubDatabaseMigrationProvider.ApplyMigrationsAsync (cognitive 26) · ×1

AdoNetStubDatabaseMigrationProvider.ApplyMigrationsAsync (cognitive 26) Revo.Infrastructure/DataAccess/Migrations/Providers/AdoNetStubDatabaseMigrationProvider.cs:70 — AdoNetStubDatabaseMigrationProvider.ApplyMigrationsAsync has cognitive complexity 26 (threshold 15). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · EntityEventToPocoProjector.ProjectEventsAsync (cognitive 22) · ×1

EntityEventToPocoProjector.ProjectEventsAsync (cognitive 22) Revo.Infrastructure/Projections/EntityEventToPocoProjector.cs:46 — EntityEventToPocoProjector.ProjectEventsAsync has cognitive complexity 22 (threshold 15). Of this number, 17 points are the body's own statements and 5 belong to 2 function literals inside it that branch. 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 · SagaConventionConfigurationScanner.AddEvents (cognitive 21) · ×1

SagaConventionConfigurationScanner.AddEvents (cognitive 21) Revo.Domain/Sagas/SagaConventionConfigurationScanner.cs:23 — SagaConventionConfigurationScanner.AddEvents has cognitive complexity 21 (threshold 15). Of this number, 20 points are the body's own statements and 1 belongs to one function literal inside it that branches. 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 · AsyncEventQueueManager.EnqueueExternalEventsAsync (cognitive 19) · ×1

AsyncEventQueueManager.EnqueueExternalEventsAsync (cognitive 19) Revo.Infrastructure/Events/Async/Generic/AsyncEventQueueManager.cs:195 — AsyncEventQueueManager.EnqueueExternalEventsAsync has cognitive complexity 19 (threshold 15). Of this number, 17 points are the body's own statements and 2 belong to 2 function literals inside it that branch. 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 · FakeRepository.SaveChanges (cognitive 18) · ×1

FakeRepository.SaveChanges (cognitive 18) Revo.Testing/Infrastructure/Repositories/FakeRepository.cs:157 — FakeRepository.SaveChanges has cognitive complexity 18 (threshold 15). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · EventSourcedAggregateStore.DoFindManyAsync (cognitive 18) · ×1

EventSourcedAggregateStore.DoFindManyAsync (cognitive 18) Revo.Infrastructure/Repositories/EventSourcedAggregateStore.cs:264 — EventSourcedAggregateStore.DoFindManyAsync has cognitive complexity 18 (threshold 15). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.

D30 · Dependency Vulnerabilities · Medium CVE · ×1

REDACTED

D4 · Code Duplication · Members sharing a duplicated core (4 members, 50+ identical tokens) · ×1

Members sharing a duplicated core (4 members, 50+ identical tokens) Providers/EF6/Revo.EF6/DataAccess/Entities/EF6CrudRepository.cs:379 — Providers/EF6/Revo.EF6/DataAccess/Entities/EF6CrudRepository.cs:379-411 | Providers/EF6/Revo.EF6/DataAccess/Entities/EF6CrudRepository.cs:414-446 | Providers/EFCore/Revo.EFCore/DataAccess/Entities/EFCoreCrudRepository.cs:400-435 | Providers/EFCore/Revo.EFCore/DataAccess/Entities/EFCoreCrudRepository.cs:438-473 — These 4 members share a duplicated core: a run of at least 50 identical tokens appears in every one of them. That run is NOT broken out as duplicated-block rows below — it is what admitted this row, and the blocks below cover only the part of it that clears the block floor, so they understate the correspondence. Read the members as one construct written 4 times. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation out once and have all of them call it with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic, generate them from one template. Extracting the individual blocks below is not the same fix: it leaves every body in place and the next edit still has to be made 4 times.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (8–45 lines × 2) · ×1

Duplicated block (8–45 lines × 2) Revo.Core/Commands/ICommandBus.cs:12 — Revo.Core/Commands/ICommandBus.cs:12-19 | Revo.Core/Commands/ICommandGateway.cs:12-56 — 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 `Revo.Core/Commands/ICommandBus.cs:12` 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 (17–20 lines × 4) · ×1

Duplicated block (17–20 lines × 4) Providers/EF6/Revo.EF6/DataAccess/Entities/EF6CrudRepository.cs:379 — Providers/EF6/Revo.EF6/DataAccess/Entities/EF6CrudRepository.cs:379-395 | Providers/EF6/Revo.EF6/DataAccess/Entities/EF6CrudRepository.cs:414-430 | Providers/EFCore/Revo.EFCore/DataAccess/Entities/EFCoreCrudRepository.cs:400-419 | Providers/EFCore/Revo.EFCore/DataAccess/Entities/EFCoreCrudRepository.cs:438-457 — before extracting anything, compare `Providers/EF6/Revo.EF6/DataAccess/Entities/EF6CrudRepository.cs` and `Providers/EFCore/Revo.EFCore/DataAccess/Entities/EFCoreCrudRepository.cs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 16 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 174 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `Providers/EF6/Revo.EF6/DataAccess/Entities/EF6CrudRepository.cs:379` it does not close everything it opens, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (13 lines × 3) · ×1

Duplicated block (13 lines × 3) Revo.Infrastructure/Projections/EntityEventProjector.cs:108 — Revo.Infrastructure/Projections/EntityEventProjector.cs:108-120 | Revo.Infrastructure/Projections/EntityEventProjector.cs:134-146 | Revo.Infrastructure/Projections/EntityEventToPocoProjector.cs:173-185 — there are 3 copies across 2 file(s) — more copies than files, so at least one file holds the block twice. Extract it once into a single shared function every call site can reach and call it from all 3 sites; resolving a subset leaves the remainder to drift apart. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `Revo.Infrastructure/Projections/EntityEventProjector.cs:108` it begins part-way through the construct above it, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that. ★ These copies have DRIFTED, and that is worth reading before extracting anything: just before the matched lines, `Revo.Infrastructure/Projections/EntityEventToPocoProjector.cs:171` calls `GetParameters`, `IsAssignableFrom` and `Revo.Infrastructure/Projections/EntityEventProjector.cs:132` does not — after which the two agree again for 3 more lines. One of those two behaviours is the intended one and the other is what a copy-paste left behind, so decide which BEFORE unifying them: extracting the shared part will silently settle it, and if the copy that skips the call is the wrong one, that bug is already live.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (9 lines × 2) · ×1

Duplicated block (9 lines × 2) Providers/EF6/Revo.EF6/Configuration/EF6InfrastructureConfigurationSection.cs:9 — Providers/EF6/Revo.EF6/Configuration/EF6InfrastructureConfigurationSection.cs:9-17 | Providers/EFCore/Revo.EFCore/Configuration/EFCoreInfrastructureConfigurationSection.cs:9-17 — before extracting anything, compare `Providers/EF6/Revo.EF6/Configuration/EF6InfrastructureConfigurationSection.cs` and `Providers/EFCore/Revo.EFCore/Configuration/EFCoreInfrastructureConfigurationSection.cs` as WHOLE FILES: 84% of the shorter file's lines also appear in the other, so this reads as one file having been copied from the other rather than as a helper waiting to be extracted. The 1 duplicated block(s) this scan matched between them are fragments of that copy, not the extent of it — treat the file pair as the unit. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (7 lines × 2) · ×1

Duplicated block (7 lines × 2) Tools/Revo.Tools.DatabaseMigrator/PreviewVerb.cs:9 — Tools/Revo.Tools.DatabaseMigrator/PreviewVerb.cs:9-15 | Tools/Revo.Tools.DatabaseMigrator/UpgradeVerb.cs:9-15 — before extracting anything, compare `Tools/Revo.Tools.DatabaseMigrator/PreviewVerb.cs` and `Tools/Revo.Tools.DatabaseMigrator/UpgradeVerb.cs` as WHOLE FILES: 83% of the shorter file's lines also appear in the other, so this reads as one file having been copied from the other rather than as a helper waiting to be extracted. The 1 duplicated block(s) this scan matched between them are fragments of that copy, not the extent of it — treat the file pair as the unit. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (18 lines × 3) · ×1

Duplicated block (18 lines × 3) Providers/EF6/Revo.EF6/DataAccess/Entities/EF6CrudRepository.cs:534 — Providers/EF6/Revo.EF6/DataAccess/Entities/EF6CrudRepository.cs:534-551 | Providers/EFCore/Revo.EFCore/DataAccess/Entities/EFCoreCrudRepository.cs:564-581 | Revo.Infrastructure/Repositories/EventSourcedAggregateStore.cs:316-333 — before extracting anything, compare `Providers/EF6/Revo.EF6/DataAccess/Entities/EF6CrudRepository.cs` and `Providers/EFCore/Revo.EFCore/DataAccess/Entities/EFCoreCrudRepository.cs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 16 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 174 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. Each matched range is the entire body of the declaration above it, so the region is already a complete unit: move that whole declaration to the shared location and have each site call it, rather than lifting the lines out of their bodies. Any `return` inside it is the body's own exit and keeps its meaning in the moved unit.

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

Duplicated block (11 lines × 2) Providers/EF6/Revo.EF6/DataAccess/Model/EntityTypeDiscovery.cs:46 — Providers/EF6/Revo.EF6/DataAccess/Model/EntityTypeDiscovery.cs:46-56 | Providers/EFCore/Revo.EFCore/DataAccess/Model/EntityTypeDiscovery.cs:44-54 — before extracting anything, compare `Providers/EF6/Revo.EF6/DataAccess/Model/EntityTypeDiscovery.cs` and `Providers/EFCore/Revo.EFCore/DataAccess/Model/EntityTypeDiscovery.cs` as WHOLE FILES: 91% of the shorter file's lines also appear in the other, so this reads as one file having been copied from the other rather than as a helper waiting to be extracted. The 2 duplicated block(s) this scan matched between them are fragments of that copy, not the extent of it — treat the file pair as the unit. The two sit in different directories, so one cannot simply be deleted in favour of the other while both are reached separately: hoist the shared part into a location both already depend on and have each file call it, and retire whichever file turns out to have no caller of its own left. Extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. Each matched range is the entire body of the declaration above it, so the region is already a complete unit: move that whole declaration to the shared location and have each site call it, rather than lifting the lines out of their bodies. Any `return` inside it is the body's own exit and keeps its meaning in the moved unit.

D8 · Code Coverage · No test project references Revo.RavenDB · ×1

No test project references Revo.RavenDB Providers/RavenDB/Revo.RavenDB/Revo.RavenDB.csproj — No test project in this repository references Revo.RavenDB (15 production source file(s)), so `dotnet test` never loads it and no coverage tool can measure it — its code is absent from the 45.1% above rather than counted at zero. This is the whole assembly, not a gap within one: add a test project that references it (or a ProjectReference from an existing suite) and its coverage starts being measured.

D8 · Code Coverage · No test project references Revo.Rebus · ×1

No test project references Revo.Rebus Providers/Rebus/Revo.Rebus/Revo.Rebus.csproj — No test project in this repository references Revo.Rebus (9 production source file(s)), so `dotnet test` never loads it and no coverage tool can measure it — its code is absent from the 45.1% above rather than counted at zero. This is the whole assembly, not a gap within one: add a test project that references it (or a ProjectReference from an existing suite) and its coverage starts being measured.

D8 · Code Coverage · No test project references Revo.Tools.DatabaseMigrator · ×1

No test project references Revo.Tools.DatabaseMigrator REDACTED — No test project in this repository references Revo.Tools.DatabaseMigrator (7 production source file(s)), so `dotnet test` never loads it and no coverage tool can measure it — its code is absent from the 45.1% above rather than counted at zero. This is the whole assembly, not a gap within one: add a test project that references it (or a ProjectReference from an existing suite) and its coverage starts being measured.

D8 · Code Coverage · CRAP 240 · ×1

CRAP 240: AdoNetStubDatabaseMigrationProvider.ApplyMigrationsAsync Revo.Infrastructure/DataAccess/Migrations/Providers/AdoNetStubDatabaseMigrationProvider.cs:70 — Cyclomatic 15 with 0.0% file coverage — too complex for how untested it is (CRAP = CC²·(1−cov)³ + CC; ≥30 needs tests or simplification).

D8 · Code Coverage · CRAP 210 · ×1

CRAP 210: AdoNetStubDatabaseMigrationProvider.CreateSchemaAsync Revo.Infrastructure/DataAccess/Migrations/Providers/AdoNetStubDatabaseMigrationProvider.cs:270 — Cyclomatic 14 with 0.0% file coverage — too complex for how untested it is (CRAP = CC²·(1−cov)³ + CC; ≥30 needs tests or simplification).

IC1 · Incompleteness & stubs · Hollow method · ×1

Hollow method — returns a constant without doing the work Providers/EF6/Revo.EF6/DataAccess/InMemory/InMemoryDbEntityEntry.cs:67 — `ReloadAsync` looks like it should compute a result but its body just returns a constant — a placeholder return that was never filled in.

IC1 · Incompleteness & stubs · Empty method body · ×1

Empty method body — does nothing with its inputs Providers/EF6/Revo.EF6/DataAccess/Model/CustomStoreConvention.cs:73 — `ConfigureProperty` takes parameters but its body is empty — it accepts inputs and does nothing. Either implement it or remove it.

IC1 · Incompleteness & stubs · Skeleton type · ×1

Skeleton type — most members are unfinished Providers/EFCore/Revo.EFCore/DataAccess/InMemory/EFCoreInMemoryDatabaseAccess.cs:9 — `EFCoreInMemoryDatabaseAccess` has 4 unfinished members out of 7 declared members (methods, properties, indexers and events, whether or not each carries a body) — a scaffolded type that was never implemented.

IC1 · Incompleteness & stubs · Fake-async · ×1

Fake-async — async method never awaits Revo.DataAccess/InMemory/InMemoryCrudRepository.cs:42 — `GetAsync` is declared `async` but never awaits anything, so it runs synchronously while pretending to be asynchronous. Drop `async` or do the real async work.

P9 · Domain vs controller coverage · Low domain coverage · ×1

Low domain coverage — Domain coverage is 34%, against a bar of 50% for this row — the layer carrying the business rules is the least covered part of the codebase that matters most. Measured over the types this analyzer classifies as domain (aggregates, value objects, domain services), so code the classifier does not place in the domain is neither counted for nor against this figure.

S1 · Cryptographic Hygiene · Weak hash algorithm · ×1

Weak hash algorithm Revo.Infrastructure/DataAccess/Migrations/SqlDatabaseMigration.cs:25 — MD5/SHA1 is constructed here, and both are collision-broken. If this digest protects anything — a signature, an integrity or tamper check, a credential, or any value an attacker can influence — that is a real weakness: use SHA-256+ for content integrity, or a KDF (PBKDF2/Argon2/BCrypt) for password storage. If it only derives a non-security identifier (a cache key, a file or mutex name), collision resistance carries no security consequence here; make that intent explicit instead — a non-cryptographic hash such as `System.IO.Hashing.XxHash64`/`Crc32` says it in code — since the algorithm alone cannot distinguish the two uses.

SC1 · Supply-chain hygiene · NuGet dependencies are not locked · ×1

NuGet dependencies are not locked — No packages.lock.json and no central package management — restores aren't reproducible or pinned (SSDF PW.4.4). Enable <RestorePackagesWithLockFile>true</RestorePackagesWithLockFile> (commit the lockfile) or adopt Directory.Packages.props. Advisory — never scored.

X1 · Async correctness · Sync-over-async (deadlock risk) through `.Result` · ×1

Sync-over-async (deadlock risk) through `.Result` Revo.Core/Commands/Lambda/LambdaCommandHandler.cs:42 — Reading `.Result` of a task that has not completed blocks this thread until it does — the same block as `.Wait()`: under a synchronization context (Blazor, a UI thread, classic ASP.NET) it deadlocks, and on the thread pool it parks a thread for as long as the work runs. `await` the task instead (make the caller `async`); where a synchronous entry point must stay, keep the block in ONE documented bridge with a timeout.

X1 · Async correctness · Sync-over-async (deadlock risk) through `Task.WaitAll` · ×1

Sync-over-async (deadlock risk) through `Task.WaitAll` Revo.Infrastructure/Jobs/InMemory/InMemoryJobWorkerProcess.cs:94 — `Task.WaitAll` blocks this thread until the tasks complete — sync-over-async: it can deadlock under a synchronization context and it parks a thread for as long as the work runs. `await Task.WhenAll(…)` instead.

X5 · Nullable reference types · Null guard scopes only part of the work it protects · ×1

Null guard scopes only part of the work it protects Revo.Infrastructure/Repositories/EventSourcedAggregateStore.cs:186 — This method contradicts itself about `aggregate`: line 171 tests it for null before doing anything with it — the author's own statement that null is an input this code expects — but that `if` scopes only the block beneath it, and line 186 then dereferences `aggregate` as `aggregate.IsDeleted` AFTER the block has closed, where the guard no longer applies. A null `aggregate` skips the guarded body and reaches that line anyway, throwing NullReferenceException on exactly the input the guard was written for. If the dereference belongs to the guarded work, move it inside the block; if `aggregate` truly cannot be null by then, the guard above is misleading and should go.

Minor — 71 finding(s)

X4 · Structured logging · Interpolated log message defeats structured logging · ×30

Interpolated log message defeats structured logging Revo.Core/Commands/CommandHandlerDiscovery.cs:49 — Logging an interpolated string (`$"..."`) collapses the event to plain text — you lose the named, queryable properties structured logging exists for. Use a message template with placeholders: `LogInformation("User {UserId} did {Action}", id, action)`. If these calls go through a logging wrapper that only accepts a pre-formatted string, give the wrapper a template+args overload that forwards to the underlying logger, then migrate call sites to it.
Interpolated log message defeats structured logging Revo.Core/Commands/CommandRouter.cs:31 — Logging an interpolated string (`$"..."`) collapses the event to plain text — you lose the named, queryable properties structured logging exists for. Use a message template with placeholders: `LogInformation("User {UserId} did {Action}", id, action)`. If these calls go through a logging wrapper that only accepts a pre-formatted string, give the wrapper a template+args overload that forwards to the underlying logger, then migrate call sites to it.
Interpolated log message defeats structured logging Revo.Core/Commands/CommandRouter.cs:67 — Logging an interpolated string (`$"..."`) collapses the event to plain text — you lose the named, queryable properties structured logging exists for. Use a message template with placeholders: `LogInformation("User {UserId} did {Action}", id, action)`. If these calls go through a logging wrapper that only accepts a pre-formatted string, give the wrapper a template+args overload that forwards to the underlying logger, then migrate call sites to it.
Interpolated log message defeats structured logging Revo.Core/Configuration/KernelBootstrapper.cs:50 — Logging an interpolated string (`$"..."`) collapses the event to plain text — you lose the named, queryable properties structured logging exists for. Use a message template with placeholders: `LogInformation("User {UserId} did {Action}", id, action)`. If these calls go through a logging wrapper that only accepts a pre-formatted string, give the wrapper a template+args overload that forwards to the underlying logger, then migrate call sites to it.
Interpolated log message defeats structured logging Revo.Core/Types/TypeExplorer.cs:34 — Logging an interpolated string (`$"..."`) collapses the event to plain text — you lose the named, queryable properties structured logging exists for. Use a message template with placeholders: `LogInformation("User {UserId} did {Action}", id, action)`. If these calls go through a logging wrapper that only accepts a pre-formatted string, give the wrapper a template+args overload that forwards to the underlying logger, then migrate call sites to it.
Interpolated log message defeats structured logging Revo.Infrastructure/DataAccess/Migrations/DatabaseMigrationExecutor.cs:70 — Logging an interpolated string (`$"..."`) collapses the event to plain text — you lose the named, queryable properties structured logging exists for. Use a message template with placeholders: `LogInformation("User {UserId} did {Action}", id, action)`. If these calls go through a logging wrapper that only accepts a pre-formatted string, give the wrapper a template+args overload that forwards to the underlying logger, then migrate call sites to it.
Interpolated log message defeats structured logging Revo.Infrastructure/DataAccess/Migrations/DatabaseMigrationExecutor.cs:156 — Logging an interpolated string (`$"..."`) collapses the event to plain text — you lose the named, queryable properties structured logging exists for. Use a message template with placeholders: `LogInformation("User {UserId} did {Action}", id, action)`. If these calls go through a logging wrapper that only accepts a pre-formatted string, give the wrapper a template+args overload that forwards to the underlying logger, then migrate call sites to it.
Interpolated log message defeats structured logging Revo.Infrastructure/DataAccess/Migrations/DatabaseMigrationExecutor.cs:160 — Logging an interpolated string (`$"..."`) collapses the event to plain text — you lose the named, queryable properties structured logging exists for. Use a message template with placeholders: `LogInformation("User {UserId} did {Action}", id, action)`. If these calls go through a logging wrapper that only accepts a pre-formatted string, give the wrapper a template+args overload that forwards to the underlying logger, then migrate call sites to it.
Interpolated log message defeats structured logging Revo.Infrastructure/DataAccess/Migrations/Providers/AdoNetStubDatabaseMigrationProvider.cs:115 — Logging an interpolated string (`$"..."`) collapses the event to plain text — you lose the named, queryable properties structured logging exists for. Use a message template with placeholders: `LogInformation("User {UserId} did {Action}", id, action)`. If these calls go through a logging wrapper that only accepts a pre-formatted string, give the wrapper a template+args overload that forwards to the underlying logger, then migrate call sites to it.
Interpolated log message defeats structured logging Revo.Infrastructure/DataAccess/Migrations/Providers/AdoNetStubDatabaseMigrationProvider.cs:141 — Logging an interpolated string (`$"..."`) collapses the event to plain text — you lose the named, queryable properties structured logging exists for. Use a message template with placeholders: `LogInformation("User {UserId} did {Action}", id, action)`. If these calls go through a logging wrapper that only accepts a pre-formatted string, give the wrapper a template+args overload that forwards to the underlying logger, then migrate call sites to it.
Interpolated log message defeats structured logging Revo.Infrastructure/DataAccess/Migrations/Providers/AdoNetStubDatabaseMigrationProvider.cs:220 — Logging an interpolated string (`$"..."`) collapses the event to plain text — you lose the named, queryable properties structured logging exists for. Use a message template with placeholders: `LogInformation("User {UserId} did {Action}", id, action)`. If these calls go through a logging wrapper that only accepts a pre-formatted string, give the wrapper a template+args overload that forwards to the underlying logger, then migrate call sites to it.
Interpolated log message defeats structured logging Revo.Infrastructure/Events/Async/AsyncEventExecutionCatchUp.cs:59 — Logging an interpolated string (`$"..."`) collapses the event to plain text — you lose the named, queryable properties structured logging exists for. Use a message template with placeholders: `LogInformation("User {UserId} did {Action}", id, action)`. If these calls go through a logging wrapper that only accepts a pre-formatted string, give the wrapper a template+args overload that forwards to the underlying logger, then migrate call sites to it.
Interpolated log message defeats structured logging Revo.Infrastructure/Events/Async/AsyncEventExecutionCatchUp.cs:85 — Logging an interpolated string (`$"..."`) collapses the event to plain text — you lose the named, queryable properties structured logging exists for. Use a message template with placeholders: `LogInformation("User {UserId} did {Action}", id, action)`. If these calls go through a logging wrapper that only accepts a pre-formatted string, give the wrapper a template+args overload that forwards to the underlying logger, then migrate call sites to it.
Interpolated log message defeats structured logging Revo.Infrastructure/Events/Async/AsyncEventProcessor.cs:65 — Logging an interpolated string (`$"..."`) collapses the event to plain text — you lose the named, queryable properties structured logging exists for. Use a message template with placeholders: `LogInformation("User {UserId} did {Action}", id, action)`. If these calls go through a logging wrapper that only accepts a pre-formatted string, give the wrapper a template+args overload that forwards to the underlying logger, then migrate call sites to it.
Interpolated log message defeats structured logging Revo.Infrastructure/Events/Async/AsyncEventWorker.cs:48 — Logging an interpolated string (`$"..."`) collapses the event to plain text — you lose the named, queryable properties structured logging exists for. Use a message template with placeholders: `LogInformation("User {UserId} did {Action}", id, action)`. If these calls go through a logging wrapper that only accepts a pre-formatted string, give the wrapper a template+args overload that forwards to the underlying logger, then migrate call sites to it.
Interpolated log message defeats structured logging Revo.Infrastructure/Events/Async/AsyncEventWorker.cs:58 — Logging an interpolated string (`$"..."`) collapses the event to plain text — you lose the named, queryable properties structured logging exists for. Use a message template with placeholders: `LogInformation("User {UserId} did {Action}", id, action)`. If these calls go through a logging wrapper that only accepts a pre-formatted string, give the wrapper a template+args overload that forwards to the underlying logger, then migrate call sites to it.
Interpolated log message defeats structured logging Revo.Infrastructure/Events/Async/ProcessAsyncEventsJobHandler.cs:30 — Logging an interpolated string (`$"..."`) collapses the event to plain text — you lose the named, queryable properties structured logging exists for. Use a message template with placeholders: `LogInformation("User {UserId} did {Action}", id, action)`. If these calls go through a logging wrapper that only accepts a pre-formatted string, give the wrapper a template+args overload that forwards to the underlying logger, then migrate call sites to it.
Interpolated log message defeats structured logging Revo.Infrastructure/Events/Async/ProcessAsyncEventsJobHandler.cs:43 — Logging an interpolated string (`$"..."`) collapses the event to plain text — you lose the named, queryable properties structured logging exists for. Use a message template with placeholders: `LogInformation("User {UserId} did {Action}", id, action)`. If these calls go through a logging wrapper that only accepts a pre-formatted string, give the wrapper a template+args overload that forwards to the underlying logger, then migrate call sites to it.
Interpolated log message defeats structured logging Revo.Infrastructure/Events/Async/ProcessAsyncEventsJobHandler.cs:48 — Logging an interpolated string (`$"..."`) collapses the event to plain text — you lose the named, queryable properties structured logging exists for. Use a message template with placeholders: `LogInformation("User {UserId} did {Action}", id, action)`. If these calls go through a logging wrapper that only accepts a pre-formatted string, give the wrapper a template+args overload that forwards to the underlying logger, then migrate call sites to it.
Interpolated log message defeats structured logging Revo.Infrastructure/Events/Async/ProcessAsyncEventsJobHandler.cs:53 — Logging an interpolated string (`$"..."`) collapses the event to plain text — you lose the named, queryable properties structured logging exists for. Use a message template with placeholders: `LogInformation("User {UserId} did {Action}", id, action)`. If these calls go through a logging wrapper that only accepts a pre-formatted string, give the wrapper a template+args overload that forwards to the underlying logger, then migrate call sites to it.
Interpolated log message defeats structured logging Revo.Infrastructure/Events/Async/ProcessAsyncEventsJobHandler.cs:63 — Logging an interpolated string (`$"..."`) collapses the event to plain text — you lose the named, queryable properties structured logging exists for. Use a message template with placeholders: `LogInformation("User {UserId} did {Action}", id, action)`. If these calls go through a logging wrapper that only accepts a pre-formatted string, give the wrapper a template+args overload that forwards to the underlying logger, then migrate call sites to it.
Interpolated log message defeats structured logging Revo.Infrastructure/Events/Async/ProcessAsyncEventsJobHandler.cs:70 — Logging an interpolated string (`$"..."`) collapses the event to plain text — you lose the named, queryable properties structured logging exists for. Use a message template with placeholders: `LogInformation("User {UserId} did {Action}", id, action)`. If these calls go through a logging wrapper that only accepts a pre-formatted string, give the wrapper a template+args overload that forwards to the underlying logger, then migrate call sites to it.
Interpolated log message defeats structured logging Revo.Infrastructure/Events/Upgrades/EventUpgradeDiscovery.cs:37 — Logging an interpolated string (`$"..."`) collapses the event to plain text — you lose the named, queryable properties structured logging exists for. Use a message template with placeholders: `LogInformation("User {UserId} did {Action}", id, action)`. If these calls go through a logging wrapper that only accepts a pre-formatted string, give the wrapper a template+args overload that forwards to the underlying logger, then migrate call sites to it.
Interpolated log message defeats structured logging Revo.Infrastructure/Jobs/InMemory/InMemoryJobScheduler.cs:69 — Logging an interpolated string (`$"..."`) collapses the event to plain text — you lose the named, queryable properties structured logging exists for. Use a message template with placeholders: `LogInformation("User {UserId} did {Action}", id, action)`. If these calls go through a logging wrapper that only accepts a pre-formatted string, give the wrapper a template+args overload that forwards to the underlying logger, then migrate call sites to it.
Interpolated log message defeats structured logging Revo.Infrastructure/Jobs/InMemory/InMemoryJobScheduler.cs:89 — Logging an interpolated string (`$"..."`) collapses the event to plain text — you lose the named, queryable properties structured logging exists for. Use a message template with placeholders: `LogInformation("User {UserId} did {Action}", id, action)`. If these calls go through a logging wrapper that only accepts a pre-formatted string, give the wrapper a template+args overload that forwards to the underlying logger, then migrate call sites to it.
+ 5 more in this group — see findings.md.

D10 · Test Quality · Mock-dominated test · ×10

Mock-dominated test: InitializesAll Tests/Revo.Core.Tests/Lifecycle/ApplicationConfigurerInitializerTests.cs:12 — This test sets up 3 test doubles (for example `Substitute.For<Func<IApplicationConfigurer[]>>()`) against 1 real object(s) of its own, and its only verification is 3 check(s) that the doubles were called. It pins how the code is wired, not what it does: it passes with a wrong result and fails when a call is harmlessly reordered or merged. Assert the outcome instead (the value returned, the state left behind), build collaborators and value objects for real or with a small hand-written fake, and keep doubles for the boundaries the test cannot own — the network, the clock, the file system.
Mock-dominated test: GetAsync_FilterGetsCalled Tests/Revo.Infrastructure.Tests/Repositories/EventSourcedAggregateStoreTests.cs:540 — This test sets up 6 test doubles (for example `Substitute.For<IRepositoryFilter>()`) against 1 real object(s) of its own, and its only verification is 1 check(s) that the doubles were called. It pins how the code is wired, not what it does: it passes with a wrong result and fails when a call is harmlessly reordered or merged. Assert the outcome instead (the value returned, the state left behind), build collaborators and value objects for real or with a small hand-written fake, and keep doubles for the boundaries the test cannot own — the network, the clock, the file system.
Mock-dominated test: SendNotificationAsync_SavesNotificationToBuffer Extensions/Tests/Revo.Extensions.Notifications.Tests/Channels/Bufferring/BufferingNotificationChannelTests.cs:35 — This test sets up 5 test doubles (for example `Substitute.For<INotificationSerializer>()`) against 2 real object(s) of its own, and its only verification is 1 check(s) that the doubles were called. It pins how the code is wired, not what it does: it passes with a wrong result and fails when a call is harmlessly reordered or merged. Assert the outcome instead (the value returned, the state left behind), build collaborators and value objects for real or with a small hand-written fake, and keep doubles for the boundaries the test cannot own — the network, the clock, the file system.
Mock-dominated test: ProjectsBeforeCommit Providers/EFCore/Tests/Revo.EFCore.Tests/Projections/EFCoreSyncProjectionHookTests.cs:32 — This test sets up 3 test doubles (for example `Substitute.For<ICommandContext>()`) against 1 real object(s) of its own, and its only verification is 1 check(s) that the doubles were called. It pins how the code is wired, not what it does: it passes with a wrong result and fails when a call is harmlessly reordered or merged. Assert the outcome instead (the value returned, the state left behind), build collaborators and value objects for real or with a small hand-written fake, and keep doubles for the boundaries the test cannot own — the network, the clock, the file system.
Mock-dominated test: ProjectsOnlyAdditionalEvents Providers/EFCore/Tests/Revo.EFCore.Tests/Projections/EFCoreSyncProjectionHookTests.cs:47 — This test sets up 3 test doubles (for example `Substitute.For<ICommandContext>()`) against 2 real object(s) of its own, and its only verification is 3 check(s) that the doubles were called. It pins how the code is wired, not what it does: it passes with a wrong result and fails when a call is harmlessly reordered or merged. Assert the outcome instead (the value returned, the state left behind), build collaborators and value objects for real or with a small hand-written fake, and keep doubles for the boundaries the test cannot own — the network, the clock, the file system.
Mock-dominated test: ProjectsAgainAfterCommitSucceeded Providers/EFCore/Tests/Revo.EFCore.Tests/Projections/EFCoreSyncProjectionHookTests.cs:72 — This test sets up 3 test doubles (for example `Substitute.For<ICommandContext>()`) against 1 real object(s) of its own, and its only verification is 1 check(s) that the doubles were called. It pins how the code is wired, not what it does: it passes with a wrong result and fails when a call is harmlessly reordered or merged. Assert the outcome instead (the value returned, the state left behind), build collaborators and value objects for real or with a small hand-written fake, and keep doubles for the boundaries the test cannot own — the network, the clock, the file system.
Mock-dominated test: ProjectsAgainAfterCommitFailed Providers/EFCore/Tests/Revo.EFCore.Tests/Projections/EFCoreSyncProjectionHookTests.cs:89 — This test sets up 3 test doubles (for example `Substitute.For<ICommandContext>()`) against 1 real object(s) of its own, and its only verification is 1 check(s) that the doubles were called. It pins how the code is wired, not what it does: it passes with a wrong result and fails when a call is harmlessly reordered or merged. Assert the outcome instead (the value returned, the state left behind), build collaborators and value objects for real or with a small hand-written fake, and keep doubles for the boundaries the test cannot own — the network, the clock, the file system.
Mock-dominated test: OnApplicationStarted_HandleMessage Providers/EasyNetQ/Tests/Revo.EasyNetQ.Tests/BusInitializerTests.cs:71 — This test sets up 3 test doubles (for example `Substitute.For<IEventMessage<Event1>>()`) against 1 real object(s) of its own, and its only verification is 1 check(s) that the doubles were called. It pins how the code is wired, not what it does: it passes with a wrong result and fails when a call is harmlessly reordered or merged. Assert the outcome instead (the value returned, the state left behind), build collaborators and value objects for real or with a small hand-written fake, and keep doubles for the boundaries the test cannot own — the network, the clock, the file system.
Mock-dominated test: OnApplicationStarted_ConfigurationAction Providers/EasyNetQ/Tests/Revo.EasyNetQ.Tests/BusInitializerTests.cs:88 — This test sets up 3 test doubles (for example `Substitute.For<Action<ISubscriptionConfiguration>>()`) against 1 real object(s) of its own, and its only verification is 1 check(s) that the doubles were called. It pins how the code is wired, not what it does: it passes with a wrong result and fails when a call is harmlessly reordered or merged. Assert the outcome instead (the value returned, the state left behind), build collaborators and value objects for real or with a small hand-written fake, and keep doubles for the boundaries the test cannot own — the network, the clock, the file system.
Mock-dominated test: PublishAsync_Event Providers/EasyNetQ/Tests/Revo.EasyNetQ.Tests/EasyNetQBusTests.cs:29 — This test sets up 3 test doubles (for example `Substitute.For<IEventMessageDraft<Event1>>()`) against 2 real object(s) of its own, and its only verification is 1 check(s) that the doubles were called. It pins how the code is wired, not what it does: it passes with a wrong result and fails when a call is harmlessly reordered or merged. Assert the outcome instead (the value returned, the state left behind), build collaborators and value objects for real or with a small hand-written fake, and keep doubles for the boundaries the test cannot own — the network, the clock, the file system.

D27 · Navigability · Pass-through layer · ×5

Pass-through layer Revo.Core/Collections/MultiValueDictionary.cs:162 — Enumerator: all 3 public methods forward their arguments unchanged to enumerator and add no behaviour — an extra hop (and usually an extra interface) to trace through. Call enumerator directly, or give the layer a job.
Pass-through layer Revo.Core/Core/NinjectServiceLocator.cs:7 — NinjectServiceLocator: all 4 public methods forward their arguments unchanged to kernel and add no behaviour — an extra hop (and usually an extra interface) to trace through. Call kernel directly, or give the layer a job.
Pass-through layer Providers/EF6/Revo.EF6/DataAccess/Entities/WrapperDbCollectionEntry{}.cs:9 — WrapperDbCollectionEntry: all 4 public methods forward their arguments unchanged to inner and add no behaviour — an extra hop (and usually an extra interface) to trace through. Call inner directly, or give the layer a job.
Pass-through layer Providers/EF6/Revo.EF6/DataAccess/Entities/WrapperDbEntityEntry.cs:8 — WrapperDbEntityEntry: all 3 public methods forward their arguments unchanged to inner and add no behaviour — an extra hop (and usually an extra interface) to trace through. Call inner directly, or give the layer a job.
Pass-through layer Providers/EF6/Revo.EF6/DataAccess/Entities/WrapperDbReferenceEntry{}.cs:8 — WrapperDbReferenceEntry: all 4 public methods forward their arguments unchanged to inner and add no behaviour — an extra hop (and usually an extra interface) to trace through. Call inner directly, or give the layer a job.

X23 · Unguarded diagnostic materialisation · Diagnostic log message is built whether or not it is wanted · ×5

Diagnostic log message is built whether or not it is wanted Revo.Core/Commands/CommandHandlerDiscovery.cs:49 — `LogDebug` at line 49 is called with an argument built by `string.Join(", ", commandHandlerTypes.Select(x => x.FullName))` (line 49), whose cost grows with the collection it walks. C# evaluates a call's arguments BEFORE entering the method, so that join/projection runs in full every time this line is reached — and then the level check inside the logger discards the string it produced, because LogDebug is a level a shipped configuration normally leaves off. Nothing here decides beforehand whether the message is wanted: no `IsEnabled` test, no debug flag, no conditional-compilation region.
Diagnostic log message is built whether or not it is wanted Revo.Infrastructure/Events/Upgrades/EventUpgradeDiscovery.cs:37 — `LogDebug` at line 37 is called with an argument built by `string.Join(", ", upgradeTypes.Select(x => x.FullName))` (line 37), whose cost grows with the collection it walks. C# evaluates a call's arguments BEFORE entering the method, so that join/projection runs in full every time this line is reached — and then the level check inside the logger discards the string it produced, because LogDebug is a level a shipped configuration normally leaves off. Nothing here decides beforehand whether the message is wanted: no `IsEnabled` test, no debug flag, no conditional-compilation region.
Diagnostic log message is built whether or not it is wanted Revo.Infrastructure/Projections/ProjectorDiscovery.cs:46 — `LogDebug` at line 46 is called with an argument built by `string.Join(", ", projectorTypes.Select(x => x.FullName))` (line 46), whose cost grows with the collection it walks. C# evaluates a call's arguments BEFORE entering the method, so that join/projection runs in full every time this line is reached — and then the level check inside the logger discards the string it produced, because LogDebug is a level a shipped configuration normally leaves off. Nothing here decides beforehand whether the message is wanted: no `IsEnabled` test, no debug flag, no conditional-compilation region.
Diagnostic log message is built whether or not it is wanted Providers/EF6/Revo.EF6/DataAccess/Model/ModelDefinitionDiscovery.cs:32 — `LogDebug` at line 32 is called with an argument built by `string.Join(", ", modelDefinitions.Select(x => x.GetType().FullName))` (line 32), whose cost grows with the collection it walks. C# evaluates a call's arguments BEFORE entering the method, so that join/projection runs in full every time this line is reached — and then the level check inside the logger discards the string it produced, because LogDebug is a level a shipped configuration normally leaves off. Nothing here decides beforehand whether the message is wanted: no `IsEnabled` test, no debug flag, no conditional-compilation region.
Diagnostic log message is built whether or not it is wanted Providers/EFCore/Revo.EFCore/DataAccess/Model/ModelDefinitionDiscovery.cs:32 — `LogDebug` at line 32 is called with an argument built by `string.Join(", ", modelDefinitions.Select(x => x.GetType().FullName))` (line 32), whose cost grows with the collection it walks. C# evaluates a call's arguments BEFORE entering the method, so that join/projection runs in full every time this line is reached — and then the level check inside the logger discards the string it produced, because LogDebug is a level a shipped configuration normally leaves off. Nothing here decides beforehand whether the message is wanted: no `IsEnabled` test, no debug flag, no conditional-compilation region.

X10 · Duplicated predicate · Duplicated predicate · ×4

Duplicated predicate Revo.Core/Configuration/KernelBootstrapper.cs:102 — `!typeof(INinjectModule).IsAssignableFrom(type) || type.IsAbstract || type.IsInterface || type.GetConstructor(Type.EmptyTypes) == null` appears character-identically in 2 files — Revo.Core/Configuration/KernelBootstrapper.cs, Tools/Revo.Tools.DatabaseMigrator/DatabaseMigrator.cs. 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 Revo.Domain/Sagas/BasicSaga.cs:27 — `base.IsChanged || uncommitedCommands.Any()` appears character-identically in 2 files — Revo.Domain/Sagas/BasicSaga.cs, Revo.Domain/Sagas/EventSourcedSaga.cs. 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 Revo.Core/Commands/CommandHandlerDiscovery.cs:36 — `x.IsClass && !x.IsAbstract && !x.IsGenericTypeDefinition` appears character-identically in 2 files — Extensions/Revo.Extensions.Notifications/NotificationTypeCache.cs, Revo.Core/Commands/CommandHandlerDiscovery.cs. 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 Providers/EF6/Revo.EF6/DataAccess/Model/EntityTypeDiscovery.cs:61 — `x.IsClass && !x.IsAbstract && !x.IsGenericTypeDefinition && x.GetCustomAttributes(typeof(DatabaseEntityAttribute), true).Length > 0 && x.Get…` appears character-identically in 2 files — Providers/EF6/Revo.EF6/DataAccess/Model/EntityTypeDiscovery.cs, Providers/EFCore/Revo.EFCore/DataAccess/Model/EntityTypeDiscovery.cs. 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.

D12 · Dependency Hygiene · Outdated · ×2

Outdated: coverlet.collector Examples/Todos/Revo.Examples.Todos.Tests/Revo.Examples.Todos.Tests.csproj:9 — coverlet.collector 6.0.4 → 10.1.0 available (referenced by Revo.Core.Tests).
Outdated: AutoMapper.Extensions.ExpressionMapping REDACTED:14 — AutoMapper.Extensions.ExpressionMapping 8.0.0 → 11.0.0 available (referenced by Revo.Extensions.History).

AX6 · Interface segregation · Fat interface · ×1

Fat interface: IReadRepository (34 members) Revo.DataAccess/Entities/IReadRepository.cs:10 — `IReadRepository` declares 34 members: `DefaultFilters`, `Get`, `Get`, `GetAsync`, `GetAsync`, `GetAsync`, `GetAsync`, `FirstOrDefault`, `First`, `GetManyAsync`, `GetManyAsync`, `GetManyAsync`, `GetManyAsync`, `FirstOrDefaultAsync`, `FirstAsync`, `Find`, `Find`, `FindAsync`, `FindAsync`, `FindAsync`, `FindAsync`, `FindAll`, `FindAllAsync`, `FindAllWithAdded`, `FindManyAsync`, `FindManyAsync`, `FindManyAsync`, `FindManyAsync`, `Where`, `WhereWithAdded`, `GetEntities`, `GetEntityState`, `SetEntityState`, `IsAttached`. Counted as the author wrote them — a property is ONE member and its get/set accessors are not counted separately, and an event counts once. Those 34 declarations carry 20 distinct name(s), so part of the width is overloading rather than separate responsibilities — but 20 operations clears the >15 bar on its own, so the row is about responsibilities, not signatures. A wide interface forces every implementer and caller to depend on methods they don't use (the Interface-Segregation 'I' in SOLID). Split it into focused role-interfaces.

C2 · Access Controls · No named authorization policies · ×1

No named authorization policies — Authorization IS enforced here (by imperative guard methods that throw on violation) — this is NOT a claim that the code is unprotected. What's missing is a NAMED rule set: the guards encode the access rules inline, so the rules can't be listed, reviewed or tested apart from the call sites that apply them. Recommendation, not a defect.

D17 · Explicit Debt · ObsoleteWithoutCallers · ×1

ObsoleteWithoutCallers Revo.Core/Core/NinjectBindingExtensions.cs:34 — [Obsolete] InRequestOrJobScope

D20 · ADR Quality · No ADRs found · ×1

No ADRs found — No ADRs found. No recognised ADR directory (`docs/adr/`, `docs/decisions/`, `adr/`, `docs/rfcs/`, an `ADR0001/` folder, or their siblings) exists anywhere in this tree. What was searched, so you can tell an empty log from a search that missed one: every directory under the tree (build output, dependencies and VCS metadata excepted), for a document that is either any non-index page inside a recognised ADR directory, whatever its name and however deeply nested (`docs/adr/use-postgres.md`, `docs/adr/2024/0001-x.md`); or a file anywhere whose name is ADR-shaped (`0001-use-postgres.md`, `adr-012-caching.md`); or, when neither turned anything up, a document carrying the decision-record signature (an "Architecture Decision Record" heading, or Status / Context / Decision / Consequences as section headings). A decision log that clears none of these — unnumbered files outside any recognised directory, without those headings — is not seen by this check and this row is then wrong. If that is your case, say so rather than renaming anything; otherwise, consider recording architectural decisions in `docs/adr/`.

D26 · Project Cohesion · Split Revo.Infrastructure · ×1

Split Revo.Infrastructure — The Infrastructure project is huge and sprawls across 25 namespaces (data access migrations, events async, sagas, projections, jobs), so it is a grab-bag. Suggested: split into Revo.Infrastructure.DataAccess.Migrations, Revo.Infrastructure.Projections, Revo.Infrastructure.Events.Upgrades, Revo.Infrastructure.Jobs.InMemory

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

REDACTED

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

REDACTED

D39 · IL Efficiency · IL efficiency · ×1

IL efficiency: 2 authored method(s) exceed the IL budget Revo.Infrastructure/DataAccess/Migrations/DatabaseMigrationRegistry.cs:39 — 2 of 2359 first-party methods compile to oversized IL bodies (> 250 instructions); worst: Revo.Infrastructure.DataAccess.Migrations.DatabaseMigrationRegistry.ValidateMigrations @ Revo.Infrastructure/DataAccess/Migrations/DatabaseMigrationRegistry.cs:39, 292 IL instructions; that pulled this dimension to 10.0/10. These bodies are far past the JIT's inline budget, so splitting them does not make them inlinable — what moves the number is emitting less: collapsing LINQ chains and closures on hot paths, and interpolation built eagerly where it is only sometimes used.

M2 · Architecture documentation · No ADRs · ×1

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

M2 · Architecture documentation · No architecture diagram/doc · ×1

No architecture diagram/doc — No C4/Structurizr/PlantUML/Mermaid/Graphviz/D2 diagram, no drawn diagram named for the architecture, no file named `architecture` or `design` in any markup this check reads, and nothing in the README, docs or contributor guides that announces the shape — no `## Architecture` heading, no "architecture overview"/"high-level design" phrasing, no "the architecture is …" introduction, no guided code tour. A shape laid out in prose that never names itself as the architecture is not visible to this check, and neither is one kept outside the repository, so this row reports the absence of a re-findable shape document — not evidence that nobody wrote the shape down.

M3 · Folder & project structure · No src/ separation · ×1

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

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

No SAST — No static application security testing detected. For this repository's stack, add CodeQL's csharp pack, or a .NET security analyzer package (or `semgrep --config=auto`, which runs on any language) as a CI step. What was searched, so you can tell an absence from a miss: the 1047 CI workflow file(s) in this repository, and the scanner and linter configuration checked in beside them. A scan that runs outside CI, one configured in your forge's web UI rather than in a committed file, or a tool whose name is none of those this check carries, is not seen — if that is your case the row is wrong, and saying so is more useful than adding a second scanner.

X2 · Cancellation propagation · Not all async methods take a CancellationToken · ×1

Not all async methods take a CancellationToken — Only 68/297 async methods accept a CancellationToken, so in-flight work can't be stopped early when the caller gives up — whatever ends it in your host (shutdown signal, timeout, abandoned request, user cancel). Thread a token through the call chain and honour it at each await and loop; where a method genuinely cannot be interrupted, omitting it is a deliberate choice — judge against your hosting model.

X5 · Nullable reference types · Nullable reference types not enabled everywhere · ×1

Nullable reference types not enabled everywhere — 0/17 NRT-eligible project(s) enable <Nullable>enable</Nullable> (projects targeting a pre-C#-8 framework are excluded — NRTs aren't available there). NRTs catch a whole class of null-deref bugs at compile time.

X7 · Silent fallback defaults · Silent fallback default on parse failure · ×1

Silent fallback default on parse failure Providers/RavenDB/Revo.RavenDB/RavenModule.cs:40 — `Load` falls back to `"http://localhost:8998"` when `connectionParams != null && connectionParams.TryGetValue("Url", out string url)` is false, with no log or throw — a malformed value silently becomes that default. Log the input or fail validation. If that constant is the correct answer to the test rather than a stand-in for a value that could not be read, this is not a silent default: say so in a comment on the member and the row stops firing.

Minor — 61 finding(s)

D12 · Dependency Hygiene · Outdated · ×31

Outdated: Microsoft.Extensions.DependencyInjection — Microsoft.Extensions.DependencyInjection 10.0.0 → 10.0.13 available (referenced by Revo.Core).
Outdated: Microsoft.Extensions.DependencyInjection.Abstractions — Microsoft.Extensions.DependencyInjection.Abstractions 10.0.0 → 10.0.13 available (referenced by Revo.Core).
Outdated: Microsoft.Extensions.Logging — Microsoft.Extensions.Logging 10.0.0 → 10.0.13 available (referenced by Revo.Core).
Outdated: Microsoft.SourceLink.GitHub — Microsoft.SourceLink.GitHub 8.0.0 → 10.0.402 available (referenced by Revo.Core).
Outdated: System.Collections.Immutable — System.Collections.Immutable 10.0.0 → 10.0.13 available (referenced by Revo.Core).
Outdated: FluentAssertions — FluentAssertions 8.8.0 → 8.11.0 available (referenced by Revo.Testing).
Outdated: NSubstitute — NSubstitute 5.3.0 → 6.2.0 available (referenced by Revo.Testing).
Outdated: Microsoft.NET.Test.Sdk — Microsoft.NET.Test.Sdk 18.0.1 → 18.11.0 available (referenced by Revo.Core.Tests).
Outdated: xunit.runner.visualstudio — xunit.runner.visualstudio 3.1.5 → 4.0.1 available (referenced by Revo.Core.Tests).
Outdated: AutoMapper — REDACTED → 16.2.0 available (referenced by Revo.Extensions.History).
Outdated: LinqKit.Core — LinqKit.Core 1.2.9 → 1.3.0 available (referenced by Revo.Infrastructure).
Outdated: EntityFramework — EntityFramework 6.5.1 → 6.5.2 available (referenced by Revo.EF6).
Outdated: Hangfire — Hangfire 1.8.22 → 1.8.25 available (referenced by Revo.Hangfire).
Outdated: RavenDB.Client — RavenDB.Client 7.1.4 → 7.2.7 available (referenced by Revo.RavenDB).
Outdated: RabbitMQ.Client — RabbitMQ.Client 7.2.0 → 7.2.2 available (referenced by Revo.Rebus).
Outdated: Rebus — Rebus 8.9.0 → 8.9.5 available (referenced by Revo.Rebus).
Outdated: Rebus.RabbitMq — Rebus.RabbitMq 10.1.0 → 10.1.2 available (referenced by Revo.Rebus).
Outdated: Microsoft.EntityFrameworkCore — Microsoft.EntityFrameworkCore 10.0.0 → 10.0.13 available (referenced by Revo.EFCore).
Outdated: Microsoft.EntityFrameworkCore.Design — Microsoft.EntityFrameworkCore.Design 10.0.0 → 10.0.13 available (referenced by Revo.EFCore).
Outdated: Microsoft.EntityFrameworkCore.InMemory — Microsoft.EntityFrameworkCore.InMemory 10.0.0 → 10.0.13 available (referenced by Revo.EFCore).
Outdated: Microsoft.EntityFrameworkCore.Proxies — Microsoft.EntityFrameworkCore.Proxies 10.0.0 → 10.0.13 available (referenced by Revo.EFCore).
Outdated: Microsoft.EntityFrameworkCore.Relational — Microsoft.EntityFrameworkCore.Relational 10.0.0 → 10.0.13 available (referenced by Revo.EFCore).
Outdated: Microsoft.EntityFrameworkCore.Tools — Microsoft.EntityFrameworkCore.Tools 10.0.0 → 10.0.13 available (referenced by Revo.EFCore).
Outdated: Hangfire.PostgreSql — Hangfire.PostgreSql 1.20.12 → 1.21.1 available (referenced by Revo.Examples.Todos).
Outdated: Microsoft.EntityFrameworkCore.Sqlite — Microsoft.EntityFrameworkCore.Sqlite 10.0.0 → 10.0.13 available (referenced by Revo.Examples.Todos).
+ 6 more in this group — see findings.md.

D19 · Documentation Quality · XML-doc coverage · ×16

XML-doc coverage: Revo.Core REDACTED — Revo.Core: 14 % XML-doc coverage (77/536).
XML-doc coverage: Revo.Domain Revo.Domain/Revo.Domain.csproj — Revo.Domain: 9 % XML-doc coverage (19/208).
XML-doc coverage: Revo.Extensions.Notifications Extensions/Revo.Extensions.Notifications/Revo.Extensions.Notifications.csproj — Revo.Extensions.Notifications: 0 % XML-doc coverage (0/109).
XML-doc coverage: Revo.Extensions.History Extensions/Revo.Extensions.History/Revo.Extensions.History.csproj — Revo.Extensions.History: 0 % XML-doc coverage (0/82).
XML-doc coverage: Revo.DataAccess Revo.DataAccess/Revo.DataAccess.csproj — Revo.DataAccess: 0 % XML-doc coverage (0/117).
XML-doc coverage: Revo.Infrastructure Revo.Infrastructure/Revo.Infrastructure.csproj — Revo.Infrastructure: 2 % XML-doc coverage (20/901).
XML-doc coverage: Revo.EF6 Providers/EF6/Revo.EF6/Revo.EF6.csproj — Revo.EF6: 1 % XML-doc coverage (4/330).
XML-doc coverage: Revo.Hangfire Providers/Hangfire/Revo.Hangfire/Revo.Hangfire.csproj — Revo.Hangfire: 0 % XML-doc coverage (0/22).
XML-doc coverage: Revo.RavenDB Providers/RavenDB/Revo.RavenDB/Revo.RavenDB.csproj — Revo.RavenDB: 0 % XML-doc coverage (0/93).
XML-doc coverage: Revo.Rebus Providers/Rebus/Revo.Rebus/Revo.Rebus.csproj — Revo.Rebus: 3 % XML-doc coverage (1/34).
XML-doc coverage: Revo.EFCore REDACTED — Revo.EFCore: 3 % XML-doc coverage (10/338).
XML-doc coverage: Revo.AspNetCore Providers/AspNetCore/Revo.AspNetCore/Revo.AspNetCore.csproj — Revo.AspNetCore: 1 % XML-doc coverage (1/76).
XML-doc coverage: Revo.Examples.Todos REDACTED — Revo.Examples.Todos: 0 % XML-doc coverage (0/105).
XML-doc coverage: Revo.EasyNetQ Providers/EasyNetQ/Revo.EasyNetQ/Revo.EasyNetQ.csproj — Revo.EasyNetQ: 4 % XML-doc coverage (2/56).
XML-doc coverage: Revo.Tools.DatabaseMigrator REDACTED — Revo.Tools.DatabaseMigrator: 0 % XML-doc coverage (0/28).
XML-doc coverage: Revo.Extensions.AutoMapper REDACTED — Revo.Extensions.AutoMapper: 0 % XML-doc coverage (0/18).

D10 · Test Quality · Mock framework · ×12

Mock framework: NSubstitute — Revo.Testing references NSubstitute.
Mock framework: NSubstitute — Revo.Core.Tests references NSubstitute.
Mock framework: NSubstitute — Revo.Domain.Tests references NSubstitute.
Mock framework: NSubstitute — Revo.DataAccess.Tests references NSubstitute.
Mock framework: NSubstitute — Revo.Infrastructure.Tests references NSubstitute.
Mock framework: NSubstitute — Revo.EF6.Tests references NSubstitute.
Mock framework: NSubstitute — Revo.Extensions.History.Tests references NSubstitute.
Mock framework: NSubstitute — Revo.Extensions.Notifications.Tests references NSubstitute.
Mock framework: NSubstitute — Revo.AspNetCore.Tests references NSubstitute.
Mock framework: NSubstitute — Revo.EFCore.Tests references NSubstitute.
Mock framework: NSubstitute — Revo.Examples.Todos.Tests references NSubstitute.
Mock framework: NSubstitute — Revo.EasyNetQ.Tests references NSubstitute.

D23 · Boundary Type-Coupling · Providers · ×1

Providers: 1 contract type(s) expose producer-owned ids/enums — In Providers, 1 contract type(s) (RebusEventListener) expose strong-typed ids/value objects (RebusEventSequencer); a serialized contract could expose the underlying primitive instead. Advisory — a deliberate strong-ID style is fine.

D23 · Boundary Type-Coupling · Revo · ×1

Revo: 2 contract type(s) expose producer-owned ids/enums — In Revo, 2 contract type(s) (ActorNameEventMetadataProvider, LockRecord) expose strong-typed ids/value objects (AsyncLock, IActorContext); a serialized contract could expose the underlying primitive instead. Advisory — a deliberate strong-ID style is fine.

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-49f19b123d9149928535845449082bc9/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-49f19b123d9149928535845449082bc9/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 .	4	artifacts/raw/semgrep.json
D30 · Dependency Vulnerabilities	dotnet	—	dotnet list Revo.sln package --vulnerable --include-transitive --format json	6	artifacts/raw/dotnet-vulnerable.json
D31 · IaC & Container Security	trivy	—	trivy: not applicable — No Infrastructure-as-Code or container manifests found (Dockerfile, Docker Compose, Terraform, Kubernetes/Helm, CloudFormation, ARM, Bicep, Ansible); nothing to scan.	0	—
D32 · Data Compliance (PII/GDPR)	semgrep	—	semgrep: not applicable — No personal data was found crossing a boundary the PII/GDPR ruleset checks — nothing written to a log or console sink, placed in a URL or query string, or persisted to browser storage. That is a clean result for the LEAK surface only: this ruleset detects personal data escaping, it does not inventory the personal data a repository holds, so it is not evidence that this repository has no personal-data surface. The personal-data map (Appendix C) and the C1-C5 compliance cards are what speak to that. semgrep could not parse 2 file(s) — `Extensions/Revo.Extensions.AutoMapper/AutoMapperModule.cs`, `Providers/EasyNetQ/Revo.EasyNetQ/EasyNetQBus.cs` — 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	none (no readable dependency manifest)	—	none (no readable dependency manifest): not applicable — Not scored — no dependency manifest in a supported ecosystem was read for this repository. A gap in the analyzer's language coverage, NOT a finding that the repository is free of vulnerable dependencies (a Python pyproject.toml/requirements.txt (pip/uv/Poetry), a Swift Package.swift/Package.resolved, a Cargo manifest, a Go module (go.mod/go.sum), a Gradle version catalogue, a Maven POM, an sbt build (build.sbt), composer.json, package.json, a Dart pubspec.yaml, an Elixir mix.exs/mix.lock (Hex), a rebar.config / erlang.mk DEPS (Hex), a Ruby Gemfile/Gemfile.lock or .gemspec (Bundler/RubyGems) — not scanned yet).	0	—

Run 01a160f1-afe6-7930-b0c9-1b4d315b3b15 · 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 — bounded-context dependency graph

Architecture: which parts of the code depend on which

At a glance — Code Health · 44% · Weak · gated by X4, X5 ·

At a glance — Architecture · 78% · Strong ·

At a glance — Maturity · 50% · Adequate · gated by M2 ·

At a glance — Readiness · 44% · Weak · gated by P3 ·

At a glance — Security · 67% · Adequate · gated by D28 ·

At a glance — Event Sourcing · 82% · Strong ·

At a glance — Performance · 60% · Adequate ·

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