salvo — Watchdog Audit

Executive summary

This system presents a fragile foundation for a medium-sized asset, scoring a weak 41% overall. While the core code is clean and the architecture is robust, the system’s ability to handle asynchronous events is critically compromised. This imbalance creates a significant risk to delivery speed and operational reliability, as the business logic is trapped behind a bottleneck that prevents efficient scaling. The value tied up in this 89,000-line codebase is substantial, with a rebuild cost of approximately €86,000, making targeted remediation far more efficient than a full rewrite.

The primary risk lies in event-driven fragility. With an event-driven health score of just 10%, the system struggles to process asynchronous tasks effectively. This is not merely a technical debt issue; it directly impacts throughput and latency, meaning the business cannot reliably scale operations during peak demand. The architecture itself is strong, but the execution layer is misaligned with modern concurrency expectations, creating a single point of failure for performance.

A secondary concern is security exposure. The scan identified eleven leaked secrets, including private keys and identity certificates. While the code health is high, the presence of these credentials in the repository poses an immediate threat. If exploited, this could lead to data breaches or unauthorized access, resulting in severe regulatory and reputational damage. The system’s maturity is also moderate, suggesting that new teams may struggle to onboard quickly without better documentation and decision records.

On the positive side, the code is highly maintainable, and the architectural design is sound, with minimal boilerplate and strong modularity. This means that once the critical bottlenecks are addressed, the system will be stable and easy to extend. The most immediate action is to resolve the secret leaks and refactor the event handlers to support proper asynchronous execution. This dual approach addresses the highest security risk and the most significant performance bottleneck, offering the greatest leverage for improving system health and business continuity.

Code Health 86% Strong Architecture 95% ★ Exemplary Maturity 67% Adequate · gated by M2 Readiness 66% Adequate · gated by D13 Security 63% Adequate · gated by D28, D36 Event-Driven 10% ⚠ Critical · gated by ED1 Performance 89% Strong

How the score is built — each lens's share of the headline Width is the lens's weight in the worst-heaviest fold (the weakest area pulls hardest); colour is that lens's own band. A lens fixes the score in proportion to its width.

Event-Driven 10% · 46% weightSecurity 63% · 25% weightReadiness 66% · 14% weightMaturity 67% · 8% weightCode Health 86% · 4% weightPerformance 89% · 2% weightArchitecture 95% · 1% weight

Raise Event-Driven 10 → 70 (the Healthy floor) ⇒ headline 41 → ~67.

Code composition — where the lines go

Tests 100%

New since the last scan (12+)

12 finding(s) are new versus the previous scan (2026-09-14) — surfaced by this scheduled scan itself, no pull request required.

D5 · Off the main sequence: salvo-serde-util
D5 · Off the main sequence: salvo_core
D6 · Low cohesion: OpenApi (LCOM4 7) crates/oapi/src/openapi.rs
D6 · Low cohesion: EncodeStream (LCOM4 6) crates/compression/src/stream.rs
D6 · Low cohesion: Router (LCOM4 6) crates/core/src/routing/router.rs
D6 · Low cohesion: DynStream (LCOM4 4) crates/core/src/conn.rs
D6 · Low cohesion: Cors (LCOM4 4) crates/cors/src/lib.rs
D22 · Duplicate method names with identical signatures. `directory` and `get_directory` appear to perform the same configuration action (setting a directory URL), likely due to a copy-paste error or incomplete refactoring.
D22 · Ambiguous duplication. `insert_typed` and `inject` both take a value `V` and return `Self`. In many contexts, 'inject' is a synonym for 'insert'. Without seeing the implementation, it is unclear if they differ by key derivation or behavior, but the naming convention is inconsistent (one is explicit about type, one is generic verb).
D22 · Duplicate method names with identical signatures. `get_typed`/`obtain` and `get_typed_mut`/`obtain_mut` appear to be synonyms for retrieving typed values from the depot.
D22 · Inconsistent naming for removal operations. `delete` returns a `bool` (success/failure), while `remove` returns a `Box` (likely the removed value or a result). This is confusing because `remove` typically implies returning the value in Rust, while `delete` implies a void/bool action. However, the return types are vastly different, suggesting they might do different things, but the names are counter-intuitive relative to their signatures.
D22 · Duplicate method signatures. Two methods named `extension` with identical parameters but different return types (`Problem` vs `Self`). This is a compile error in Rust unless they are in different traits or one is a typo in the API surface description. Assuming it's a valid surface, this is a severe inconsistency/error.

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

Rebuild cost & value ~ Modeled — €28,000–€140,000

Cost to rebuild	€28,000–€140,000 (0.3–0.9 person-years (475–1,507 h), ~1–2 engineers)
Domain complexity	Standard — harder problems cost more per line
Quality factor	0.7× (at 41% quality) — the last 20% of quality is most of the work
Size & shape	Medium · effort split not classified (source measured from disk; the effort-tier breakdown is a C#-only syntax walk)

This codebase represents roughly ~0.6 person-years of build effort (about ~€86,000 to rebuild). Its weakest lens is Event-Driven at 10% — the part of that asset most exposed by the findings below.

How we model this: boilerplate at a scaffolding rate + logic × domain Standard (×1.0) — standard service × a 0.7× quality factor, at €60–95/h; indicative, ±~30% · size measured directly from source · effort from total production LoC as straight-line logic (the tier split is a C#-only syntax walk), a conservative lower bound. Indicative only — most sensitive to the hourly rate and the domain tier (both tunable in config).

Top priorities

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

Move the awaited work off the handler (`tokio::spawn`/`Handle::current().spawn`) or make the handler `async` so it can `.await` — a sync handler cannot simply `.await` in place.

+26.9 pts · Medium effort · Handler temporal coupling

Resolve the 3 REDACTED finding(s) in Static Analysis (SAST) — start with REDACTED, REDACTED, REDACTED.

+0.9 pts · Low effort · Static Analysis (SAST)

Resolve the 11 Leaked secret finding(s) in REDACTED Scanning — start with REDACTED (7), REDACTED (3), REDACTED.

+1.8 pts · Medium effort · REDACTED Scanning

Diagnosis — what's actually going on

Value concentrated against a weak lens · High · Value at risk

This is a Medium asset (~0.6 person-years to rebuild), and its weakest lens is Event-Driven at 10%. The operational and business risk on an asset this size concentrates there — that's where remediation buys the most protection.

Evidence: valuation: Medium, ~0.6 person-years rebuild (89,424 LoC) · weakest lens: Event-Driven 10%

→ Direct remediation budget at Event-Driven first — highest risk-reduction per euro on an asset this size.

Highest-leverage move · Medium · Leverage

Of everything flagged, the best return on effort is: Move the awaited work off the handler (`tokio::spawn`/`Handle::current().spawn`) or make the handler `async` so it can `.await` — a sync handler cannot simply `.await` in place. The rest can wait behind it.

Evidence: priority ranking: top of 5 ranked by impact/effort

→ Move the awaited work off the handler (`tokio::spawn`/`Handle::current().spawn`) or make the handler `async` so it can `.await` — a sync handler cannot simply `.await` in place.

Architecture — module dependency graph

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

Architecture — module dependency matrix

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

253 modules, 799 dependencies. 9 dependency cycles across 78 modules, marked above the diagonal.

Showing the 40 most-connected modules; 213 more are not drawn.

Module dependency matrix. The row depends on the column; the number is how many type pairs create the dependency. A cell above the diagonal is part of a dependency cycle.
depends on →	1 salvo_core.extract.metadata	2 salvo_core.http.response	3 salvo_oapi.openapi.schema.array	4 salvo_core.routing.flow_ctrl	5 salvo_core.routing.router	6 salvo_oapi.openapi.schema	7 salvo_oapi.openapi.components	8 salvo_oapi.openapi	9 salvo_oapi.openapi.parameter	10 salvo_oapi_macros.shared	11 salvo_oapi.openapi.operation	12 salvo_oapi_macros.feature	13 salvo_oapi.endpoint	14 salvo_oapi_macros.parse_utils	15 salvo_oapi_macros.schema_type	16 salvo_oapi_macros.feature.attributes	17 salvo_core.conn.ctrl	19 salvo_core.fuse	20 salvo_core.conn.proto	21 salvo_core.http.request	22 salvo_core.handler	23 salvo_csrf	24 salvo_flash	25 salvo_core.depot	27 salvo_core.extract	28 salvo_core.writing	32 salvo_oapi	35 salvo_core.http.errors.status_error	37 salvo_core.catcher	39 salvo_core.service
1 salvo_core.extract.metadata
2 salvo_core.http.response																1		1
3 salvo_oapi.openapi.schema.array						3		3								2
4 salvo_core.routing.flow_ctrl		1															1			1				1
5 salvo_core.routing.router		1														1				1
6 salvo_oapi.openapi.schema			3					1								2
7 salvo_oapi.openapi.components						1
8 salvo_oapi.openapi		1	1	1	1	1	1									1				1	1			1
9 salvo_oapi.openapi.parameter								4
10 salvo_oapi_macros.shared								2				1				2
11 salvo_oapi.openapi.operation								1	1
12 salvo_oapi_macros.feature						3		2	1	1						29
13 salvo_oapi.endpoint							3				3
14 salvo_oapi_macros.parse_utils												2				2
15 salvo_oapi_macros.schema_type										3		2
16 salvo_oapi_macros.feature.attributes						1		1	4	5		71		2	2
17 salvo_core.conn.ctrl																1
18 salvo_oapi_macros.operation		1	1						1			2				1
19 salvo_core.fuse																1	1
20 salvo_core.conn.proto																1	1	1
21 salvo_core.http.request	1	1		1												1		1			1			2
22 salvo_core.handler		5		5																7				7
23 salvo_csrf		2		1																3	1			3
24 salvo_flash		2		1																2	1			2
25 salvo_core.depot																						1	2
26 salvo_cache		2		2												2				4	1			4
27 salvo_core.extract	1																			1				1
28 salvo_core.writing		2																		1				1
29 salvo_cors		2		1												1				1	1			1
30 salvo_cors.inner																1				3				3
31 salvo_oapi.swagger_ui		1		1	1															1	1			1
32 salvo_oapi							8	4	2																1
33 salvo_core.extract.payload.form	1						1				1		1							1				1	1		1
34 salvo_core.extract.payload.json	1						1				1		1							1				1	1		1
35 salvo_core.http.errors.status_error		1					1	1			1		1													1	3
36 salvo_core.writing.json		1					1	1			1		1													1	2
37 salvo_core.catcher		4		2												1	1			4	2			3				1
38 salvo_core.error		1					1	1			1		1													1	3	1
39 salvo_core.service		2		1	2												2	2		3	1			1					2
40 salvo_core.conn																	1	1	1											1

Dependency, pointing down the layeringAbove the diagonal — part of a cycleThe module itself

At a glance — Code Health · 86% · Strong ·

The Good

D3 · Rust God Classes 8.8 D4 · Rust Code Duplication 9.4 D17 · Rust Explicit Debt 10.0

The Bad

D1 · Rust Cyclomatic Complexity 6.5 D2 · Rust Cognitive Complexity 5.4

At a glance — Architecture · 95% · Exemplary ·

The Good

D5 · Rust Coupling 9.3 D6 · Rust Cohesion (LCOM4) 9.8 D26 · Rust Project Cohesion 9.1 D35 · Rust Change Coupling 9.3 AX10 · Repo Code composition 9.2 AX3 · Repo Project dependency cycles 10.0 AX4 · Repo Dependency direction 10.0 AX9 · Repo CQS / query purity 10.0

The Bad

D22 · Rust Internal API Consistency 6.0

At a glance — Maturity · 67% · Adequate · gated by M2 ·

The Good

D15 · Rust Churn × Complexity Hotspots 9.7 D19 · Rust Documentation Quality 8.5 D21 · Rust Naming Consistency 10.0 D34 · Rust Knowledge Freshness 10.0 M1 · Repo Documentation (README) 7.2 M3 · Repo Folder & project structure 10.0 M4 · Repo Documentation accuracy 10.0

The Ugly

M2 · Repo Architecture documentation 2.0

At a glance — Readiness · 66% · Adequate · gated by D13 ·

The Good

D9 · Rust Test Distribution 10.0 D10 · Rust Test Quality 10.0 P1 · Repo CI/CD gates 10.0 P10 · Repo Library API & versioning 10.0 P3 · Repo Security & performance tooling 9.0 P4 · Repo Deployment & Rollback 8.0 P6 · Repo Release Hygiene 10.0 P8 · Repo Schema migrations 10.0

The Ugly

D13 · Rust REDACTED Scanning 0.0

At a glance — Security · 63% · Adequate · gated by D28, D36 ·

The Good

D30 · Rust Dependency Vulnerabilities 10.0 D31 · Rust IaC & Container Security 10.0 D37 · Rust Vulnerability-disclosure Policy 10.0 D43 · Rust Malicious Dependencies 10.0 D44 · Rust Platform End-of-Life 10.0

The Ugly

D28 · Rust Secrets (history) 0.0 D29 · Rust Static Analysis (SAST) 4.2 D36 · Rust Supply-chain Provenance & Signing 0.0

At a glance — Event-Driven · 10% · Critical · gated by ED1 ·

The Ugly

ED1 · Repo Handler temporal coupling 1.0

At a glance — Performance · 89% · Strong ·

The Good

PF1 · Repo Benchmark discipline 8.0 PF3 · Repo Async & latency hygiene 10.0

Security & Compliance — OWASP Top-10 mapping

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

OWASP category	Findings	Severity
A02:2021 — Cryptographic Failures	38	High / Critical
A03:2021 — Injection	33	High / Critical

Roadmap

First, resolve the 11 leaked secrets by removing sensitive files like REDACTED and REDACTED, and fix the handler temporal coupling by moving awaited work off the synchronous handler. Next, document significant architectural decisions in a dedicated ADR directory and add a testing section to the root README to clarify how to run the test suite. Finally, implement an approval gate for releases to prevent bad builds from being published without human intervention.

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

Do this	Helps	Effort	Dimension
Move the awaited work off the handler (`tokio::spawn`/`Handle::current().spawn`) or make the handler `async` so it can `.await` — a sync handler cannot simply `.await` in place.	+26.9 pts	Medium	Handler temporal coupling
Resolve the 3 REDACTED finding(s) in Static Analysis (SAST) — start with REDACTED, REDACTED, REDACTED.	+0.9 pts	Low	Static Analysis (SAST)
Resolve the 11 Leaked secret finding(s) in REDACTED Scanning — start with REDACTED (7), REDACTED (3), REDACTED.	+1.8 pts	Medium	REDACTED Scanning
Record significant decisions one document per decision — dated, stating the context, the decision and its consequences — and keep them together wherever your design docs already live (a conventional `docs/adr/` tree, with each file named `NNNN-title` in whatever markup those docs already use, is the most discoverable form).	+1.8 pts	Medium	Architecture documentation
Add a 'Testing' section to the root README — how to run the test suite.	+1.7 pts	Medium	Documentation (README)
Nothing pauses a release for a human: publish as a draft release (or gate the release job on a protected tag/manual dispatch) so a bad build can be stopped before users can download it.	+1.5 pts	Medium	Deployment & Rollback
Resolve the 22 REDACTED finding(s) in Secrets (history) — start with REDACTED (15), REDACTED (4), REDACTED.	+1.5 pts	Medium	Secrets (history)
Resolve the 4 High secret finding(s) in Secrets (history) — start with REDACTED (3), REDACTED.	+0.7 pts	Low	Secrets (history)

File quality

Per-file score 0–10 — a quality signature. Of 127 files carrying findings, judged against the Production bar: 0% slop · 69% mixed · 31% near-clean.

File	Score	Band	Worst signal
REDACTED	4.4	Mixed	REDACTED Scanning: Leaked secret: REDACTED
REDACTED	4.4	Mixed	REDACTED Scanning: Leaked secret: REDACTED
REDACTED	4.4	Mixed	REDACTED Scanning: Leaked secret: REDACTED
REDACTED	4.4	Mixed	REDACTED Scanning: Leaked secret: REDACTED
REDACTED	4.4	Mixed	REDACTED Scanning: Leaked secret: REDACTED
REDACTED	4.4	Mixed	REDACTED Scanning: Leaked secret: REDACTED
REDACTED	4.4	Mixed	REDACTED Scanning: Leaked secret: REDACTED
REDACTED	4.4	Mixed	REDACTED Scanning: Leaked secret: REDACTED
REDACTED	4.4	Mixed	REDACTED Scanning: Leaked secret: REDACTED
REDACTED	4.4	Mixed	REDACTED Scanning: Leaked secret: REDACTED
REDACTED	4.4	Mixed	REDACTED Scanning: Leaked secret: REDACTED
REDACTED	4.4	Mixed	Static Analysis (SAST): High: REDACTED
REDACTED	4.6	Mixed	Static Analysis (SAST): High: REDACTED
REDACTED	4.8	Mixed	Static Analysis (SAST): High: REDACTED
REDACTED	5.1	Mixed	Static Analysis (SAST): High: REDACTED
crates/core/src/fs/named_file.rs	5.5	Mixed	Cyclomatic Complexity: NamedFile::send_inner (cyclomatic 31)
crates/oapi/src/openapi.rs	5.6	Mixed	Cyclomatic Complexity: OpenApi::merge_norm_node (cyclomatic 19)
crates/core/src/conn/native_tls/listener.rs	5.6	Mixed	Code Duplication: Duplicated block (17 lines × 3)
REDACTED	5.8	Mixed	Secrets (history): REDACTED: REDACTED
REDACTED	5.8	Mixed	Static Analysis (SAST): High: REDACTED

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 — 70

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 — 291

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

Minor — 13

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

Could not be resolved — 39

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. 37 of 42 evaluated dimensions are computed purely by tools and static analysis (confidence 1.0); 5 documentation/naming judgement(s) are LLM-assisted and labelled advisory. Overall confidence is 0.8 — the weighted average across measured dimensions; it falls as more of the score leans on LLM-assisted judgement and rises when it's fully tool-backed.

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

What we checked — 42 dimensions across the health lenses

D1D2D3D4D5D6D9D10D13D15D17D19D21D22D26D28D29D30D31D34D35D36D37D43D44AX10AX3AX4AX9ED1M1M2M3M4P1P10P3P4P6P8PF1PF3

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, 355 of 374 do; the remainder are repo-wide signals — a dimension-level measurement, not a single line. (Every path in this report is repo-relative by construction: paths are normalized at the producer and the report is rejected if any rooted path leaks through.)
Is there a tool behind the number? Every score below names the method that produced it — Roslyn, git, a scanner, or (for a handful of documentation/naming dimensions) an LLM labelled sampled · advisory — not a narrative.
Does re-running give the same result? Run it again on the same commit and the score — and this report, byte for byte — is identical. A report whose numbers move between runs is describing the run, not the code.

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

Tools & methods

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

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

Every finding is locatable in findings.md. Run 01a0f26d-9ef8-782b-adf8-17b9ec126ced.

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

Run transparency — what happened this run

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

D8 Code Coverage — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. Coverage NOT READ here — but this repository measures it: a coverage step in CI (`cargo tarpaulin`) shows that coverage is collected and tracked in your own CI. The built-in collector has no runner for this ecosystem (.rs, .js), so the analyzer could not read the number — a gap in the analyzer's language coverage, not an unmeasured repo. Not scored. To have the real number read, produce a coverage report in a standard format (lcov — `cargo install cargo-llvm-cov`, then `cargo llvm-cov --lcov --output-path lcov.info`, or lcov — `vitest --coverage`, `jest --coverage`, `bun test --coverage --coverage-reporter=lcov`, or `nyc`) and commit it — a hosted scan measures a clone of the repository, so a report that exists only in a working tree, a CI runner's or your own, never reaches it; the artefact is commonly gitignored, so `git add -f` that one file (or un-ignore its path) and commit it alongside the code it measures. You can widen what we reach: optional: produce a coverage report in a standard format (lcov — `cargo install cargo-llvm-cov`, then `cargo llvm-cov --lcov --output-path lcov.info`, or lcov — `vitest --coverage`, `jest --coverage`, `bun test --coverage --coverage-reporter=lcov`, or `nyc`) and commit it — a hosted scan measures a clone of the repository, so a report that exists only in a working tree, a CI runner's or your own, never reaches it; the artefact is commonly gitignored, so `git add -f` that one file (or un-ignore its path) and commit it alongside the code it measures — then the real number is read on the next scan.
D10 Test Quality — measured, with a gap in what it reached — Watchdog measured this, but not all of it. What it did not reach is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — so the numbers on that dimension cover less than the repository, and the part left out is not evidence that it would have passed. The 1 test(s) behind this row are the ones the JavaScript/TypeScript census could read, and this repository also carries at least 159 test source file(s) (.rs) that it cannot: it reads JavaScript/TypeScript test declarations off disk, so a JUnit/pytest-style suite is invisible to it. Skipped tests, zero-assertion tests and the other quality signals on this row are UNMEASURED in that suite — their absence from the counts above is a gap in this analyzer's language coverage, not a finding that those tests are sound.
D11 Test Reliability — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. Test reliability not included — the Rust suite (repository root, 196 test files) did not finish re-running within its budget: the Cargo suite did not finish re-running within its tier budget.
D12 Dependency Hygiene — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. Not scored — 25 direct Cargo declaration(s) were read, but the outdated signal needs crates.io, and no committed Cargo.lock resolves them to versions, so this dimension's own question is only partly answered. NOT a finding that these dependencies are current or healthy.
D14 License Compliance — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. Not scored — this repository declares Cargo manifests but commits no Cargo.lock, so the set of crates it actually ships is not resolvable from the checkout: its declarations carry version RANGES, and grading whichever release happens to be newest today would be a verdict about a dependency graph this repository has not pinned. Commit the lock and this dimension grades the closure against crates.io. NOT a finding that this repository's licences are compliant: this dimension asserts nothing about its licensing in either direction.
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 (93 contributor(s) across 3852 commit(s) sampled, automation and bot accounts excluded). One of them holds 89% of the history; the other 92 hold 0.1% 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.
D30 Dependency Vulnerabilities — measured, with a gap in what it reached — Watchdog measured this, but not all of it. What it did not reach is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — so the numbers on that dimension cover less than the repository, and the part left out is not evidence that it would have passed. The scanner produced no output at all, so no dependency was actually scanned. 1 of 2 declared ecosystem(s) (npm) WERE scanned and every vulnerability they reported is included in this result; osv was not, so this dimension's score covers less than the dependency surface this repository declares, and nothing here is evidence that osv is free of known-vulnerable dependencies.
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. `crates/oapi/src/swagger_ui/v5.32.11/swagger-ui.js` 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.
D43 Malicious Dependencies — measured, with a gap in what it reached — Watchdog measured this, but not all of it. What it did not reach is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — so the numbers on that dimension cover less than the repository, and the part left out is not evidence that it would have passed. The scanner produced no output at all, so no dependency was actually scanned. 1 of 2 declared ecosystem(s) (npm) WERE scanned and every vulnerability they reported is included in this result; osv was not, so this dimension's score covers less than the dependency surface this repository declares, and nothing here is evidence that osv is free of known-vulnerable dependencies.
AX6 Interface segregation — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is computed over the public interfaces this run's compilations declare, and none was loaded, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
C1 Data Protection — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. These personal data controls are read from declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names and guard methods in a C# source model, and none was loaded on this run, so there was nothing to gather. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository lacks personal data controls.
C2 Access Controls — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. These authorization controls are read from declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names and guard methods in a C# source model, and none was loaded on this run, so there was nothing to gather. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository lacks authorization controls.
C3 Audit Trail — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. These audit controls are read from declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names and guard methods in a C# source model, and none was loaded on this run, so there was nothing to gather. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository lacks audit controls.
C4 Data Retention — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. These retention controls are read from declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names and guard methods in a C# source model, and none was loaded on this run, so there was nothing to gather. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository lacks retention controls.
C5 Data-Subject Rights — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. These data-subject rights controls are read from declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names and guard methods in a C# source model, and none was loaded on this run, so there was nothing to gather. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository lacks data-subject rights controls.
ED5 Idempotency — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check finds retry-prone mutations by walking the repository's declared types, and NONE was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to look at. That is a limit of the analyzer's reach — it reads .NET projects — not a finding that this repository has no command handlers or message consumers.
GD1 Unfinished & placeholder code — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
IC1 Incompleteness & stubs — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
S1 Web-Security Posture — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. These web-security controls are read from declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names and guard methods in a C# source model, and none was loaded on this run, so there was nothing to gather. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository lacks web-security controls.
X1 Async correctness — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X12 Unreachable branch — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X13 Undrained process stream — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X14 Bypassable address classification — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X15 Unvalidated length from an untrusted reader — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X16 Unfloored truncation loop — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X17 Uncapped recursion over a caller-supplied document — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X18 Disposal-pattern correctness — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X19 Unrestored process-global state — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X2 Cancellation propagation — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X20 Mistyped argument guard — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X21 Side-effecting pattern guard — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X22 Contradicted release guard — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X23 Unguarded diagnostic materialisation — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X24 Document value interpolated into markup unescaped — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X25 Inert configuration knob — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X26 Unsynchronised callback handoff — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X27 Collection changed while being enumerated — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X28 Index access outside its own emptiness guard — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X29 Per-element action decided by a fixed element — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check reads C# syntax, and JavaScript/TypeScript source only, and no C# was loaded and no JavaScript/TypeScript was found in this repository, so it had nothing of this repository's product to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X3 Exception handling — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X30 Support guard that admits what it rejects — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X4 Structured logging — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X5 Nullable reference types — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is implemented over the C# syntax tree, and no C# was loaded on this run, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.

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

Limitations & what we did not check

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

Per-dimension blind spots

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

D1 Cyclomatic Complexity: Cyclomatic complexity counts branches statically — it cannot tell an essential decision tree from accidental tangle, nor see complexity that lives in data or configuration (large switch-case token tables, DSL lexers/parsers, data-as-code rule tables) rather than control flow: a tokenizer's many single-character cases read as high complexity though each branch is trivial.
D2 Cognitive Complexity: Cognitive-complexity heuristics approximate how hard code is to follow; genuine domain difficulty and well-named intent that eases reading are not captured.
D3 God Classes: "God class" is sized by members and responsibilities visible in the type — a deliberately broad facade over a coherent subsystem can read the same as an accidental grab-bag. For front-end JS the file-length check is cohesion-aware (a single-responsibility module — one class/IIFE — earns a 3× threshold), but cohesion is approximated from top-level declarations, not true dependency structure.
D4 Code Duplication: Duplication is token-similarity — an in-process token-stream comparison over sliding windows, with type-aware normalization — so it finds copy-paste, not semantic duplication expressed differently. Committed machine-written code (scaffolded migrations, designer/codegen output, protobuf/OpenAPI stubs, model snapshots) is EXCLUDED — its repetition is the tool's, not the team's — so the score reflects hand-written duplication only.
D5 Coupling: Coupling is measured between projects/assemblies — runtime coupling through DI, reflection, messaging or shared databases is invisible to a static reference graph.
D6 Cohesion (LCOM4): LCOM4 cohesion is syntactic — it infers connectivity from which methods touch which fields/methods by name, not from real runtime behaviour or intent.
D9 Test Distribution: The test-pyramid shape is inferred from project/folder naming and references, with a single test host bucketed per-file by its path tier and content signals — a suite that names tiers unconventionally and gives no per-file signal can still be mis-bucketed.
D10 Test Quality: Assertion density is structural — it cannot tell a meaningful behavioural assertion from a trivial one, only that an assertion is present.
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").
D15 Churn × Complexity Hotspots: Churn hotspots come from git history — a freshly imported or squashed repository has no churn signal, and recent rewrites can mask a historically risky file.
D17 Explicit Debt: Acknowledged-debt signals (TODO/FIXME, suppressions, dead code) are textual — undocumented debt that nobody marked, and debt that lives in design rather than annotations, is invisible. Committed machine-written code (scaffolded migrations, designer/codegen output, generated stubs) is excluded — it is never the team's dead code to delete.
D19 Documentation Quality: Documentation quality is judged by an LLM over a bounded sample of docs — it reads what is written, not whether the docs match the running system, and it is advisory, not a measurement. Its critique rows are drawn from a closed category vocabulary and each row means the same thing in every run, so two scans can be compared row by row; the SET that fires is still a sample, and does not repeat exactly. Measured on one frozen input, six scans at one engine SHA: 2-5 critique rows per scan, 8 distinct rows across the six, 3 of those 8 seen in only one scan. So a D19 row is evidence about the documentation, but a COUNT of D19 rows is not a quantity — never read a change in it as an improvement or a regression.
D21 Naming Consistency: Naming quality is an LLM judgement over a bounded sample — it assesses clarity/consistency of the names it sees, not domain-correctness, and is advisory.
D22 Internal API Consistency: API-surface coherence is an LLM judgement over a sample of the public surface — consistency of intent across the whole API is approximated, not exhaustively verified.
D26 Project Cohesion: Project focus is sized from members/namespaces per project — a project that is broad by deliberate design reads the same as one that has sprawled.
D28 Secrets (history): Secret-history scanning sweeps the git log for known patterns — a secret that predates the available history, or never matched a signature, is not found (clean means "nothing matched in the history we can see").
D29 Static Analysis (SAST): SAST findings are pattern-based (semgrep) — it finds classes of bug it has rules for; logic flaws, auth/authorization gaps and issues needing runtime context are out of reach (and clean means "no rule matched").
D30 Dependency Vulnerabilities: CVE matching depends on accurate package/version metadata and on the advisory databases — a vulnerability with no published advisory, or in code not declared as a dependency, is not seen. Coverage needs a RESOLVED graph: an unpinned requirements.txt, or a pom without a resolved build, yields partial coverage rather than a clean verdict. An ecosystem the analyzer cannot scan is reported as unmeasured, never as clean.
D31 IaC & Container Security: IaC scanning checks Dockerfiles/Terraform/Kubernetes against best-practice rules — it cannot see the live cloud account, runtime configuration, or drift between the committed config and what is actually deployed.
D34 Knowledge Freshness: Freshness is decayed commit RECENCY, not comprehension — code read often but rarely committed reads as orphaned, and stable code that genuinely needs no changes is penalised the same as forgotten code; bot/squash commits distort it like the bus factor.
D35 Change Coupling: Change coupling is co-change in COMMITS — files split across separate commits, or coupled only through a shared config/build step, read as uncoupled, and a sweeping commit (rename/format) is excluded so it doesn't couple everything. It shows that files change together, not WHY: a high coupling can be a healthy cohesive pair as readily as a hidden leak.
D43 Malicious Dependencies: Only packages some vulnerability database has already NAMED as malicious are seen — a compromise published in the last hours, or never reported at all, is invisible here, and this dimension reading 10 is not evidence that a dependency is trustworthy. There is no typosquat or dependency-confusion analysis: a package nobody has reported is simply absent from the feeds. Coverage is the dependency scan's: an ecosystem that could not be scanned is disclosed as unmeasured, never as clean.
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.
M4 Documentation accuracy: Onboarding quality is an LLM read of the docs/setup present — it cannot run the onboarding or measure how long a real new joiner takes; the verdict is sampled and advisory.
P4 Deployment & Rollback: Approval/branch-protection rules live in repository settings the scan cannot see — only their in-repo evidence (config files, workflows) is checked, so a control enforced purely in the host's settings reads as "not evidenced".
P6 Release Hygiene: Rollback/observability controls are inferred from repo artefacts (pipelines, dashboards-as-code) — controls configured in external tooling, with no in-repo trace, cannot be credited.

The LLM boundary

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

Dimensions

D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity6.5 / 10Adequate✓ Tool-verified

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

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

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 6.5 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Prevented

29 function(s) exceeded the cyclomatic complexity threshold of 15; the worst was salvo_tus::handlers::post::create at 65. A further 9 function(s) were over the threshold but excluded as flat dispatchers (a long switch/match over independent cases: many branches, almost no nesting), the largest being Feature::fmt at 47 — they are counted neither in the figure above nor in this dimension's score. 4 files carry no cyclomatic complexity row at all for this reason — every one of their over-threshold functions was excluded, so the exclusion is disclosed nowhere in the file itself: crates/oapi-macros/src/feature.rs (Feature::fmt at 47), crates/core/src/http/errors/status_error.rs (StatusError::from_code at 40), crates/oapi-macros/src/schema_type.rs (Variant::parse at 30), crates/tus/src/error.rs (TusError::status at 20). They are named here because the per-file figures other dimensions report are taken BEFORE this exclusion, so such a file can show a high maximum complexity elsewhere in this report and nothing here, with nothing to reconcile the two.

salvo_tus::handlers::post::create (cyclomatic 65) · ×3crates/tus/src/handlers/post.rs:21

StraightStream::poll_write (cyclomatic 16) · ×2crates/core/src/conn/stream/straight.rs:116

StaticDir::handle (cyclomatic 56)crates/serve-static/src/dir.rs:486

RequestDeserializer::fill_value (cyclomatic 52)crates/core/src/serde/request.rs:267

salvo_oapi_macros::bound::with_bound (cyclomatic 40)crates/oapi-macros/src/bound.rs:57

+ 21 more group(s) — more in Appendix A; the complete list is findings.md.

What to do

Resolve the 3 salvo_tus finding(s) in Cyclomatic Complexity — start with post.rs, patch.rs, head.rs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (3 warning-level).
Resolve the 2 StraightStream finding(s) in Cyclomatic Complexity — start with straight.rs (2). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (2 warning-level).
Resolve the 1 StaticDir finding(s) in Cyclomatic Complexity — start with dir.rs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).
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 Complexity5.4 / 10Adequate✓ Tool-verified

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

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

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 5.4 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Prevented

65 function(s) exceeded the cognitive complexity threshold of 15; the worst was RequestDeserializer::fill_value at 183.

RequestDeserializer::fill_value (cognitive 183) · ×3crates/core/src/serde/request.rs:267

salvo_tus::handlers::post::create (cognitive 99) · ×3crates/tus/src/handlers/post.rs:21

PathParser::scan_wisps (cognitive 73) · ×3crates/core/src/routing/filters/path.rs:828

salvo_oapi_macros::bound::with_bound (cognitive 38) · ×3crates/oapi-macros/src/bound.rs:57

StraightStream::poll_write (cognitive 31) · ×3crates/core/src/conn/stream/straight.rs:116

+ 44 more group(s) — more in Appendix A; the complete list is findings.md.

What to do

Resolve the 3 RequestDeserializer finding(s) in Cognitive Complexity — start with request.rs (3). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (3 warning-level).
Resolve the 3 salvo_tus finding(s) in Cognitive Complexity — start with post.rs, patch.rs, head.rs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (3 warning-level).
Resolve the 3 PathParser finding(s) in Cognitive Complexity — start with path.rs (3). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (3 warning-level).
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 Classes8.8 / 10Strong✓ Tool-verified

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

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

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 8.8 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Prevented

36 god class(es) detected.

MethodTooLong: NamedStructSchema.try_to_tokens · ×14crates/oapi-macros/src/schema/struct_schemas.rs:182

FileTooLong: schema/enum_schemas.rs · ×11crates/oapi-macros/src/schema/enum_schemas.rs

TooManyMethods: Request · ×4crates/core/src/http/request.rs:157

FunctionTooLong: salvo_tus::handlers::post::create · ×4crates/tus/src/handlers/post.rs:21

ClassTooLong: Request · ×3crates/core/src/http/request.rs:157

What to do

Resolve the 14 MethodTooLong finding(s) in God Classes — start with enum_schemas.rs (4), struct_schemas.rs (2), named_file.rs (2). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (14 warning-level).
Resolve the 11 FileTooLong finding(s) in God Classes — start with enum_schemas.rs, path.rs, lib.rs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (11 warning-level).
Resolve the 4 TooManyMethods finding(s) in God Classes — start with request.rs, router.rs, openapi.rs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (4 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 Duplication9.4 / 10Stronggated by 120 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 9.4 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Verified

118 duplicated block group(s) detected. A further 2 rows report members as variants of one another; they aggregate block groups already counted above and are not themselves counted.

Duplicated block (5 lines × 2) · ×9crates/oapi/src/openapi/path.rs:158

Duplicated block (9 lines × 2) · ×8crates/core/src/conn/stream/handshake.rs:55

Duplicated block (8 lines × 2) · ×6crates/core/src/conn/tcp.rs:199

Duplicated block (7 lines × 2) · ×6crates/oapi-macros/src/operation/request_body.rs:76

Duplicated block (12 lines × 2) · ×5crates/core/src/server.rs:358

+ 50 more group(s) — more in Appendix A; the complete list is findings.md.

What to do

Resolve the 9 Duplicated block (5 lines × 2) finding(s) in Code Duplication — start with path.rs, rapidoc.rs, disk.rs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (9 warning-level).
Resolve the 8 Duplicated block (9 lines × 2) finding(s) in Code Duplication — start with handshake.rs, server.rs, openapi.rs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (8 warning-level).
Resolve the 6 Duplicated block (8 lines × 2) finding(s) in Code Duplication — start with tcp.rs, req.rs, handler.rs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (6 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 · Coupling9.3 / 10Stronggated by 2 serious findings✓ 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 9.3 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Prevented

22 production modules (Cargo), 0 dependency cycle(s), 0 unstable depended-on module(s). Read from the build's own module declarations; 2 module(s) off the main sequence, with abstractness counted on 17 of the 22 (the rest declare no modelled class or interface, export only macros, or have no source directory of their own).

Off the main sequence: salvo-serde-util · ×2

What to do

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

D6 · Cohesion (LCOM4)9.8 / 10Stronggated by 5 serious findings✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

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

5 of 256 classes have LCOM4 above 3.

Low cohesion: OpenApi (LCOM4 7) · ×5crates/oapi/src/openapi.rs:87

What to do

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

D9 · Test 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

1580 test methods: 1541 unit, 39 integration, 0 BDD, 0 e2e. The JavaScript/TypeScript suite contributes 1 `it`/`test` case(s) across 1 test file(s) declaring at least one; its tier split is read from package names and paths only. The Rust suite contributes 1579 `#[test]` function(s) across 196 file(s) declaring at least one; its unit/integration split is Cargo's own — 12 of those file(s) are integration-test targets under a crate's tests/ directory, and the rest are #[test] functions compiled into the crate they test.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d9_recommendation.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

D10 · Test Quality10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

0 skipped, 0 zero-assertion, no mocking-framework packages referenced (hand-written doubles or no mocking) across 1 tests. Measured on the JavaScript/TypeScript suite only — at least 159 test source file(s) (.rs) went unread, so its test quality is unmeasured and is not in these counts.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d10_recommendation.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

D13 · REDACTED Scanning0.0 / 10Critical✓ Tool-verified

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 0.0 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Prevented

11 secret(s) detected.

REDACTED

What to do

Resolve the 11 Leaked secret finding(s) in REDACTED Scanning — start with REDACTED (7), REDACTED (3), REDACTED. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (11 issue-level).
Enforce REDACTED Scanning in CI to reach Verified (currently Documented). — Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Prevented — provenance only; does not change the score.

Detailed fixes: d13_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

D15 · Churn × Complexity Hotspots9.7 / 10Stronggated by 6 serious findings✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

Top hotspots: crates/serve-static/src/dir.rs (7×56=392); crates/core/src/service.rs (4×29=116); crates/core/src/fs/named_file.rs (3×31=93)

Hotspot: crates/serve-static/src/dir.rs · ×6crates/serve-static/src/dir.rs:486

What to do

Resolve the 6 Hotspot finding(s) in Churn × Complexity Hotspots — start with dir.rs, service.rs, named_file.rs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (6 warning-level).

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

D17 · Explicit Debt10.0 / 10Stronggated by 15 serious findings✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

15 deducted task-comment markers across 89424 LoC (0.0/KLoC) → score 10.0. Task comments only: this repository's language is read without a compiler, so D17's suppression, dead-code and commented-out-code arms did not run and this score counts fewer marker kinds than a .NET repository's would.

TodoComment · ×14crates/core/src/conn/proto.rs:372

FixmeCommentcrates/oapi-macros/src/schema/enum_schemas.rs:930

What to do

Resolve the 14 TodoComment finding(s) in Explicit Debt — start with client.rs (4), proto.rs, req.rs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (14 warning-level).
Resolve the 1 FixmeComment finding(s) in Explicit Debt — start with enum_schemas.rs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).
Enforce Explicit Debt in CI to reach Verified (currently Documented). — Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Prevented — provenance only; does not change the score.

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

D19 · Documentation QualityStrong◐ 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 Strong / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

The repository's root README is excellent: it opens with a logo and links to the Chinese and Hant-translation docs, shows build status badges for Linux/Mac/Windows CI, crates.io coverage, documentation.rs, and a Rust version banner; it also lists an outline of features, quick start, handler types, why Salvo?, middleware as handler, tree routing, JSON APIs, derive(Deserialize), OpenAPI in one line, auto HTTPS with ACME, CLI tool, learn more, recommended projects, performance, support, and license. The READMEs for the fuzz/, acme/, cache/, cors/, craft-macros/, craft/, csrf/, flash/ directories each document their own subdirectory (fuzzing, ACME middleware, caching, CORS protection) rather than the root repository, so they are not judged against the root's overview/installation/usage/contributing sections. The internal jargon ('cargo-fuzz', 'PathFilter::new') is present and unambiguous; there is no missing-architecture-docs or missing-license section to flag. All 32 README files for the Salvo crates are directory-level documentation (each is a crate's own README), not the repository root. The visible content is consistent across them: salvo branding and build-status badges; crates.io/crates/salvo download/dependency icons; Rust version and unsafe-forbidden warnings; a salvo.rs website badge; and an outline of each crate's features, installation, quick start, usage, and license sections (e.g. 'salvo-oapi-macros: Provide a OpenAPI supports for Salvo.' plus the full list). The visible text is complete and well-structured. The repository's READMEs are mostly focused on per-directory examples (e.g. 'Salvo Postgres Diesel Boilerplate', 'Clerk + React Starter') rather than a cohesive project overview and the root README; there is no single architecture or design doc, so the missing-architecture-docs category cannot be applied to any document. The READMEs are well written for their audience (the examples directories), with clear prerequisites, install/run steps, and an example preview section showing how each part connects.

Documentation: no project overviewREADME.md

What to do

Resolve the 1 Documentation finding(s) in Documentation Quality — start with README.md. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 recommendation-level).

Detailed fixes: d19_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 0 sampled symbols.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d21_recommendation.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

D22 · Internal API ConsistencyAdequate◐ Sampled · advisory

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

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

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

5 API inconsistencies across a 400-member sample of 342 exposed types.

Duplicate method names with identical signatures. `directory` and `get_directory` appear to perform the same configuration action (setting a directory URL), likely due to a copy-paste error or incomplete refactoring.

Ambiguous duplication. `insert_typed` and `inject` both take a value `V` and return `Self`. In many contexts, 'inject' is a synonym for 'insert'. Without seeing the implementation, it is unclear if they differ by key derivation or behavior, but the naming convention is inconsistent (one is explicit about type, one is generic verb).

Duplicate method names with identical signatures. `get_typed`/`obtain` and `get_typed_mut`/`obtain_mut` appear to be synonyms for retrieving typed values from the depot.

Inconsistent naming for removal operations. `delete` returns a `bool` (success/failure), while `remove` returns a `Box` (likely the removed value or a result). This is confusing because `remove` typically implies returning the value in Rust, while `delete` implies a void/bool action. However, the return types are vastly different, suggesting they might do different things, but the names are counter-intuitive relative to their signatures.

Duplicate method signatures. Two methods named `extension` with identical parameters but different return types (`Problem` vs `Self`). This is a compile error in Rust unless they are in different traits or one is a typo in the API surface description. Assuming it's a valid surface, this is a severe inconsistency/error.

What to do

Resolve the 1 Duplicate method names with identical signatures. `directory` and… finding(s) in Internal API Consistency. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).
Resolve the 1 Ambiguous duplication. `insert_typed` and `inject` both take a value `V`… finding(s) in Internal API Consistency. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).
Resolve the 1 Duplicate method names with identical signatures. `get_typed`/`obtain`… finding(s) in Internal API Consistency. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

D26 · Project Cohesion9.1 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

1 of 22 build units (Cargo) flagged as possibly oversized/incoherent.

Split crates/core

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

D28 · Secrets (history)0.0 / 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 0.0 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

26 finding(s): 0 critical, 26 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 22 REDACTED finding(s) in Secrets (history) — start with REDACTED (15), REDACTED (4), REDACTED. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (22 issue-level).
Resolve the 4 High secret finding(s) in Secrets (history) — start with REDACTED (3), REDACTED. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (4 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)4.2 / 10Weak✓ 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 4.2 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

33 finding(s): 0 critical, 32 high, 0 medium, 1 low. 27 unpinned-GitHub-Actions row(s) are reported here but scored by D36 (supply-chain provenance), which measures that posture as `pinned_actions` — one pinning decision is charged once, not once per lens. semgrep hit a parse error in 4 file(s) — `crates/core/src/extract/parameter/cookie.rs` (line 15), `crates/core/src/http/response.rs` (line 278, lines 278–280, lines 281–282, …), `crates/oapi/src/swagger_ui/v5.32.11/swagger-ui-standalone-preset.js`, `crates/oapi/src/swagger_ui/v5.32.11/swagger-ui.js` — 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.

REDACTED

What to do

Resolve the 3 REDACTED finding(s) in Static Analysis (SAST) — start with REDACTED, REDACTED, REDACTED. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (3 issue-level).
Resolve the 1 REDACTED finding(s) in Static Analysis (SAST) — start with REDACTED. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 issue-level).
No action in Static Analysis (SAST) — all 27 REDACTED finding(s) are reported here at file:line but scored by D36 (supply-chain provenance), so none is charged to this dimension. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (27 issue-level, 0 of them charged here).

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

D30 · Dependency Vulnerabilities10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

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 10.0 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

No known-vulnerable dependencies in the 1 ecosystem(s) that were scanned (npm). Partial dependency scan: 1 of 2 declared ecosystem(s) were scanned (npm), and the findings above are real and complete for them. osv was not scanned (osv: the scanner produced no output at all, so no dependency was actually scanned), so this is not the whole dependency surface and the result is reported at reduced confidence.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d30_recommendation.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

D31 · IaC & Container Security10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

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

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

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

trivy and checkov found no infrastructure-as-code or container misconfigurations.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d31_recommendation.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 230 of the 260 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 Coupling9.3 / 10Stronggated by 4 serious findings✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

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

Strongest change-coupling: listener.rs↔listener.rs 94%; listener.rs↔listener.rs 88%; listener.rs↔listener.rs 88%

Change coupling clique: listener.rs, config.rs, listener.rs, listener.rs, listener.rs · ×2crates/core/src/conn/native_tls/listener.rs

Change coupling: named_file.rs ↔ seek.rs · ×2crates/core/src/fs/named_file.rs

What to do

Resolve the 2 Change coupling clique finding(s) in Change Coupling — start with listener.rs, cookie.rs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (2 warning-level).
Resolve the 2 Change coupling finding(s) in Change Coupling — start with named_file.rs, req.rs. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (2 warning-level).

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

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

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

REDACTED

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

What to do

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

D37 · Vulnerability-disclosure Policy10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

What it measures: Whether the repository publishes a coordinated-vulnerability-disclosure policy (SECURITY.md or security.txt) with a reporting contact, so finders know how to report a vulnerability. Presence of a policy file with a contact, not whether the policy is adequate or honoured.

Method: Vulnerability-disclosure policy read deterministically from the repo: a SECURITY.md (root/.github/docs) or .well-known/security.txt / security.txt, regex-checked for a reporting contact (email / URL / mailto). Present + contact → 10; present without a contact → 4; NotApplicable when no policy file exists (it may live off-repo). Detects the policy file's presence + contact, not its adequacy.

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

A vulnerability-disclosure policy (SECURITY.md) is published with a reporting contact.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d37_recommendation.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

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

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d43_recommendation.md.

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

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

0 end-of-life runtime(s) and 0 end-of-life framework(s), read from 1 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.

AX10 · Code composition9.2 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

What to do

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

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?

ED1 · Handler temporal coupling1.0 / 10Critical✓ Tool-verified

Other · Event-Driven — Whether event/message handlers avoid synchronous blocking waits — a blocking wait inside a handler stalls throughput and risks deadlock.

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

`Timeout.handle` is an event/message handler that blocks the executor on a synchronous wait (`block_on`/`blocking_recv`/`thread::sleep`/a blocking `recv()`) — it stalls the handler and serialises throughput, and on an async runtime can starve the reactor. Either move the awaited work off the handler (`tokio::spawn`/`Handle::current().spawn`, if the result isn't needed inline) or make the handler itself `async` so it can `.await`. — crates/extra/src/timeout.rs:91

What to do

Move the awaited work off the handler (`tokio::spawn`/`Handle::current().spawn`) or make the handler `async` so it can `.await` — a sync handler cannot simply `.await` in place.

Do you agree with this assessment?

M1 · Documentation (README)7.2 / 10Strong✓ Tool-verified

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

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

What to do

Add a 'Testing' section to the root README — 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 89 of 118 project(s) that lack one — worth up to 1.5 pts.

Do you agree with this assessment?

M2 · Architecture documentation2.0 / 10Critical✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

What to do

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

M4 · Documentation 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 & versioning10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

P3 · Security & performance tooling9.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

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

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

What to do

Dependabot is configured but does not watch `github-actions`, `npm` — add those `package-ecosystem` entries to REDACTED so those dependencies get the same automatic update and advisory pressure as the ones it already covers.
Add gitleaks/trufflehog in CI to block PRs that introduce committed secrets.

Do you agree with this assessment?

P4 · Deployment & Rollback8.0 / 10Strong✓ Tool-verified

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

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

The release is automated and no gate that pauses it for a human is DECLARED IN THIS REPOSITORY'S PIPELINE FILES. What was read: every file under `.github/workflows/`, `.forgejo/workflows/`, `.gitea/workflows/`, `.azuredevops/` and `.azure-pipelines/`, plus `.gitlab-ci*` and `azure-pipelines*` — with comment text stripped, so documenting a gate is not declaring one. What would have counted: GitLab's `when: manual`, CircleCI's `type: approval`, an Azure `ManualValidation@` task or an `approvals:` block, a Jenkins `input` step, a `uses:` step naming an approval action, an `environment:` paired with `reviewers` / `required_reviewers` / `protection` / `wait-timer` / `deployment_branch_policy`, a draft-release step, a `workflow_dispatch` promotion, or a release-event gate. ★ What this cannot see, because none of it is a file: a GitHub environment whose required reviewers are configured in repo SETTINGS, a branch protection rule, or an organisation deployment policy — all of them real, enforced gates that live outside the repository. If yours is one of those, this row is wrong and nothing in the tree could have told us. Otherwise: whatever the release trigger points at is published to users unreviewed, so a mistagged or unverified commit ships and the only remedy is a follow-up release.

What to do

Nothing pauses a release for a human: publish as a draft release (or gate the release job on a protected tag/manual dispatch) so a bad build can be stopped before users can download it.

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 database schema changes go through versioned migrations rather than being auto-created from the model at startup.

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?

PF1 · Benchmark discipline8.0 / 10Strong✓ Tool-verified

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

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

Do you agree with this assessment?

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

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

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

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	86%	Strong	Solid.
Architecture	95%	Exemplary	Strongest area.
Maturity	67%	Adequate — gated by M2	Capped at Fair by a Critical contributor — resolve it before relying on this lens.
Readiness	66%	Adequate — gated by D13	Capped at Fair by a Critical contributor — resolve it before relying on this lens.
Security	63%	Adequate — gated by D28, D36	Capped at Fair by a Critical contributor — resolve it before relying on this lens.
Event-Driven	10%	Critical — gated by ED1	Capped at Fair by a Critical contributor — resolve it before relying on this lens.
Performance	89%	Strong	Solid.

Unscored — 4 check(s) recorded observations but carry no score

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

P12 CI test-gate honesty — 1 observation(s) recorded · Reported, not scored — this card publishes what the CI gate does with the test inventory rather than grading it. The findings above are its output.
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 — 1 observation(s) recorded · Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score.
X6 Hand-rolled structured-format parsing — 2 observation(s) recorded · Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score.

Not evidenced — 4 control(s) we could not find positive evidence for

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

C3 Audit Trail — Not assessed: these audit controls are read from a source model (declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names, guard methods) that was not loaded for this repository — because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. Absence of an idiom this check recognises is NOT evidence that this repository lacks audit controls: it may implement them entirely in its own ecosystem. This is a gap in the analyzer's language coverage, not a finding about this repository.
C4 Data Retention — Not assessed: these retention controls are read from a source model (declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names, guard methods) that was not loaded for this repository — because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. Absence of an idiom this check recognises is NOT evidence that this repository lacks retention controls: it may implement them entirely in its own ecosystem. This is a gap in the analyzer's language coverage, not a finding about this repository.
C5 Data-Subject Rights — Not assessed: these data-subject rights controls are read from a source model (declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names, guard methods) that was not loaded for this repository — because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. Absence of an idiom this check recognises is NOT evidence that this repository lacks data-subject rights controls: it may implement them entirely in its own ecosystem. This is a gap in the analyzer's language coverage, not a finding about this repository.
P5 DR & Backup — not evidenced — repo shows no backup/RTO/RPO controls; absence of evidence is not evidence of a working control

Not included — 72 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 — Frontend below the scale floor (4 DOM element(s) < 25) — too little surface to assess accessibility.
AC2 Forms & labels — Frontend below the scale floor (4 DOM element(s) < 25) — too little surface to assess accessibility.
AC3 Page structure — Frontend below the scale floor (4 DOM element(s) < 25) — too little surface to assess accessibility.
AC4 Keyboard semantics — Frontend below the scale floor (4 DOM element(s) < 25) — too little surface to assess accessibility.
AC5 ARIA correctness — Frontend below the scale floor (4 DOM element(s) < 25) — too little surface to assess accessibility.
AC6 Visual & motion safety — Frontend below the scale floor (4 DOM element(s) < 25) — too little surface to assess accessibility.
AC7 A11y enforcement — Frontend below the scale floor (4 DOM element(s) < 25) — too little surface to assess accessibility.
AX1 Captive dependencies — Not applicable: this repository's JavaScript imports no dependency-injection container and defines no container of its own — nothing that both registers and resolves bindings, and nothing that names two lifetimes — so nothing holds one lifetime's instance while handing out another's; Rust with no dependency-injection crate has no container to hand one lifetime's instance to another — every value is owned by the code that builds it, and the borrow checker rejects a longer-lived value keeping a borrow of a shorter-lived one.
AX2 Stateful singletons — Not applicable: Rust's compiler refuses unsynchronised shared mutation — a value shared across threads must be Sync — so the race this check looks for cannot be written. TypeScript/JavaScript runs each process's requests on one event loop, so no two requests write a shared object at the same instant (interleaving across an await is a different defect).
AX5 Architecture & structure — not assessed — architecture style/structure is computed from a project graph (projects, types, module namespaces) that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
AX6 Interface segregation — not assessed — interface segregation is computed over a type surface that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
AX7 Slice cohesion — not applicable — not a vertical-slice architecture
AX8 Test isolation — no test/production split to check
AXB2 Runtime readiness — Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score, so there is nothing missing here.
AXR1 Runtime accessibility — compose up failed (exit 18 — an image could not be pulled) — pgadmin4 Pulling db Pulling db Error Get "https://registry-1.docker.io/v2/": Forbidden pgadmin4 Error context canceled Error response from daemon: Get "https://registry-1.docker.io/v2/": Forbidden; the earlier `compose pull` step reported: app Skipped - No image to be pulled pgadmin4 Pulling db Pulling pgadmin4 Error Get "https://registry-1.docker.io/v2/": Forbidden db Error context canceled Error response from daemon: Get "https://registry-1.docker.io/v2/": Forbidden; the runtime sandbox reaches registries only through the in-fence pull-through mirror, so an image the mirror does not carry cannot be fetched — this is a limit of our sandbox, not of your stack; runtime evidence skipped This is a statement about this run, not a statement about your application: nothing here says the surface is inaccessible, only that it was never rendered.
C1 Data Protection — Not assessed: these personal data controls are read from a source model (declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names, guard methods) that was not loaded for this repository — because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. Absence of an idiom this check recognises is NOT evidence that this repository lacks personal data controls: it may implement them entirely in its own ecosystem. This is a gap in the analyzer's language coverage, not a finding about this repository.
C2 Access Controls — Not assessed: these authorization controls are read from a source model (declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names, guard methods) that was not loaded for this repository — because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. Absence of an idiom this check recognises is NOT evidence that this repository lacks authorization controls: it may implement them entirely in its own ecosystem. This is a gap in the analyzer's language coverage, not a finding about this repository.
D11 Test Reliability — Test reliability not included
D12 Dependency Hygiene — Not scored — 25 direct Cargo declaration(s) were read, but the outdated signal needs crates.io, and no committed Cargo.lock resolves them to versions, so this dimension's own question is only partly answered. NOT a finding that these dependencies are current or healthy.
D14 License Compliance — Crate licences not graded — this Cargo repository commits no Cargo.lock
D16 Bus Factor — single-maintainer repository — bus factor is not applicable
D18 Solution Shape — D18 scores the shape of a .NET solution; this repository has no .NET solution or project files, so the dimension does not apply.
D20 ADR Quality — N/A — ADRs are expected on deployable products with a user-facing host, not consumed libraries; no ADR log is required here.
D23 Boundary Type-Coupling — No bounded-context organisation was detected either — neither a context-shaped layout nor 2+ sibling source directories each declaring an aggregate root. Declaring this codebase's bounded contexts (≥2) would let cross-boundary type coupling be assessed. Declare them in `.codehealth/config.yaml` at the repository root (create it if absent), mapping each context name to the module-path or namespace prefixes that belong to it — e.g. `architecture:` → `contexts:` → `Billing: ["src/billing", "Acme.Billing"]`, `Catalog: ["src/catalog", "Acme.Catalog"]`.
D24 Comment Value — No inline comments to assess — comment value is not applicable here.
D25 ADR Conformance — no ADRs to check
D27 Navigability — symbol resolution incomplete — navigability not assessed
D32 Data Compliance (PII/GDPR) — 1 file(s) were not parsed by semgrep — the PII/GDPR ruleset never ran over them
D39 IL Efficiency — D39 measures the IL emitted by a .NET build; this repository has no .NET solution or project files, so the dimension does not apply.
D40 Network Egress Confinement — No Kubernetes/orchestration workloads found in the repository manifests; network egress policy is a cluster-native control that may live at the platform/firewall layer, so there is nothing to assess here.
D41 Kernel & Syscall Confinement — No Kubernetes/orchestration workloads found in the repository manifests; seccomp/AppArmor/SELinux confinement is a workload-level control, so there is nothing to assess here.
D42 Runtime Threat Enforcement — No Kubernetes/orchestration workloads found in the repository manifests; runtime threat-detection and admission-control policy are cluster-level controls, so there is nothing to assess here.
D7 Architectural Integrity — no checkable ADRs, and no project-reference graph for the cycle pass to read — so this dimension makes no claim about dependency cycles in either direction (where this repository's language has an import-cycle lens, cycles are reported there). Architectural integrity not assessed
D8 Code Coverage — Coverage not included — suite not readable by the collector
DM1 Domain Modelling — not scored — this repository shows only 1 of the 3 signals this lens looks for (103 value object(s))
ED2 Event/command shape — not scored — deciding whether a command has more than one competing handler requires resolving the call graph, and a call made through an inferred or generic receiver has no resolvable owner in the source. Reported as guidance rather than measured
ED5 Idempotency — This check finds retry-prone mutations (command handlers and message/event consumers) by walking the repository's declared types, and none was loaded here, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
ES1 Event Sourcing — not scored — this repository shows none of the 3 signals this lens looks for
GD1 Unfinished & placeholder code — no source files were read — this check reads C# syntax, and none was loaded for this repository. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
IC1 Incompleteness & stubs — not analysed — these correctness checks read a source model that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
P2 Observability — This repository's JavaScript/TypeScript, Rust source (24 module(s), 265 file(s) read) declares no entry point and bootstraps no server, and nothing here deploys a service — it is a library, run inside whatever hosts it, so production observability (structured logging, tracing/metrics, health checks) is N/A. If it grows a binary or a service, the dimension reactivates.
P7 Outbound HTTP resilience — not applicable — no HTTP server, API framework or worker entry point was found in the JavaScript/TypeScript, Rust source, so there is no service whose uptime a failing dependency could take down
P9 Domain vs controller coverage — no coverage report found on disk — produce a coverage report in a standard format (lcov — `cargo install cargo-llvm-cov`, then `cargo llvm-cov --lcov --output-path lcov.info`) and commit it — a hosted scan measures a clone of the repository, so a report that exists only in a working tree, a CI runner's or your own, never reaches it; the artefact is commonly gitignored, so `git add -f` that one file (or un-ignore its path) and commit it alongside the code it measures, or wire coverage collection into CI, to enable this cross-layer check
PF2 Allocation hygiene — Not applicable: TypeScript/JavaScript runs on a garbage-collected runtime that gives a program no allocation-control idiom to choose on a hot path — no pools, stack allocation or value types — so allocation awareness is not something this code can be rated on. Rust spells out every heap allocation and makes borrowed slices (&[T], &str) its ordinary parameter types, so the allocation-aware style this card rewards elsewhere is the language's baseline rather than a rung to climb.
S1 Web-Security Posture — Not assessed: these web-security controls are read from a source model (declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names, guard methods) that was not loaded for this repository — because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. Absence of an idiom this check recognises is NOT evidence that this repository lacks web-security controls: it may implement them entirely in its own ecosystem. This is a gap in the analyzer's language coverage, not a finding about this repository.
X1 Async correctness — not analysed — these correctness checks read a source model that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
X12 Unreachable branch — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
X13 Undrained process stream — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
X14 Bypassable address classification — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
X15 Unvalidated length from an untrusted reader — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
X16 Unfloored truncation loop — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
X17 Uncapped recursion over a caller-supplied document — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
X18 Disposal-pattern correctness — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
X19 Unrestored process-global state — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
X2 Cancellation propagation — not analysed — these correctness checks read a source model that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
X20 Mistyped argument guard — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
X21 Side-effecting pattern guard — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
X22 Contradicted release guard — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
X23 Unguarded diagnostic materialisation — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
X24 Document value interpolated into markup unescaped — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
X25 Inert configuration knob — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
X26 Unsynchronised callback handoff — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
X27 Collection changed while being enumerated — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
X28 Index access outside its own emptiness guard — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
X29 Per-element action decided by a fixed element — not analysed — these correctness checks read a source model that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
X3 Exception handling — not analysed — these correctness checks read a source model that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
X30 Support guard that admits what it rejects — This check reads C# syntax; no C# was loaded for this repository, so it has nothing to report. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
X32 Type resolved by simple name across every loaded assembly — This check is about how a .NET program searches the assemblies loaded into its process for a type, and this repository contains no .NET source, so there is nothing here for it to assess. Not a gap in the analyzer and not a finding about your code.
X4 Structured logging — not analysed — these correctness checks read a source model that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
X5 Nullable reference types — not analysed — these correctness checks read a source model that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
X7 Silent fallback defaults — Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score, so there is nothing missing here.
X9 Subsumed condition operand — Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score, so there is nothing missing here.

Appendix A — Findings (grouped)

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

Critical — 70 finding(s)

D29 · Static Analysis (SAST) · REDACTED

REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
+ 2 more in this group — see findings.md.

D28 · Secrets (history) · REDACTED · ×22

REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED

D13 · REDACTED Scanning · Leaked secret · ×11

REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED

D28 · Secrets (history) · High secret · ×4

REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED

D29 · Static Analysis (SAST) · REDACTED

REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED

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

REDACTED

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

REDACTED

ED1 · Handler temporal coupling · Blocking wait inside a handler · ×1

Blocking wait inside a handler: Timeout.handle crates/extra/src/timeout.rs:91 — `Timeout.handle` is an event/message handler that blocks the executor on a synchronous wait (`block_on`/`blocking_recv`/`thread::sleep`/a blocking `recv()`) — it stalls the handler and serialises throughput, and on an async runtime can starve the reactor. Either move the awaited work off the handler (`tokio::spawn`/`Handle::current().spawn`, if the result isn't needed inline) or make the handler itself `async` so it can `.await`.

Serious — 291 finding(s)

D17 · Explicit Debt · TodoComment · ×14

TodoComment crates/core/src/conn/proto.rs:372 — // TODO: There should be a way to do following two lines cleaner... — 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 crates/core/src/conn/quinn/client.rs:523 — /// TODO: If data is polled before the response has been received, an error will be thrown. — 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 crates/core/src/conn/quinn/client.rs:525 — /// TODO: If trailers are polled but the body hasn't been fully received, an UNEXPECTED_FRAME error will be — 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 crates/core/src/conn/quinn/client.rs:637 — // TODO what if called before recv_response ? — 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 crates/core/src/conn/quinn/client.rs:655 — // TODO take by value to prevent any further call as this request is cancelled — 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 crates/core/src/http/body/req.rs:347 — // TODO: check this — 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 crates/oapi-macros/src/type_tree.rs:261 — // TODO should we recognize unknown generic types with `GenericType::Unknown` instead of `None`? — 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 crates/oapi-macros/src/component.rs:631 — // TODO: refs support `summary` field but currently there is no such — 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 crates/oapi-macros/src/schema/enum_schemas.rs:507 — // TODO need to be able to split variant.attrs for variant and the struct representation! — 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 crates/oapi/src/openapi/schema.rs:364 — // TODO: REMOVE THE unnecessary description Option wrapping. — 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 crates/otel/src/tracing.rs:95 — // TODO: Will remove after opentelemetry_http updated — 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 crates/tus/src/handlers/patch.rs:118 — // TODO: Time handle — 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 crates/tus/src/handlers/head.rs:73 — // TODO: Time handle — 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 examples/todos-utoipa/src/main.rs:241 — /// Todo not found from storage — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.

D3 · God Classes · MethodTooLong · ×14

MethodTooLong: NamedStructSchema.try_to_tokens crates/oapi-macros/src/schema/struct_schemas.rs:182 — MethodTooLong — try_to_tokens runs 226 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded, and inline test code — #[cfg(test)] modules and bare #[test] functions — not counted) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 126 over it, 2.26× the bar. This is length, not branching: a long straight-line body scores low on complexity and is still read whole to change any part of it, so the complexity numbers beside this row neither confirm nor excuse it. To reduce it, extract each cohesive step of the body — the runs of statements that work on the same values and would earn the same name — into its own named unit, and have this one call them in order.
MethodTooLong: ComponentSchema.non_generic_to_tokens crates/oapi-macros/src/component.rs:393 — MethodTooLong — non_generic_to_tokens runs 225 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded, and inline test code — #[cfg(test)] modules and bare #[test] functions — not counted) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 125 over it, 2.25× the bar. This is length, not branching: a long straight-line body scores low on complexity and is still read whole to change any part of it, so the complexity numbers beside this row neither confirm nor excuse it. To reduce it, extract each cohesive step of the body — the runs of statements that work on the same values and would earn the same name — into its own named unit, and have this one call them in order.
MethodTooLong: StaticDir.handle crates/serve-static/src/dir.rs:486 — MethodTooLong — handle runs 170 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded, and inline test code — #[cfg(test)] modules and bare #[test] functions — not counted) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 70 over it, 1.70× the bar. This is length, not branching: a long straight-line body scores low on complexity and is still read whole to change any part of it, so the complexity numbers beside this row neither confirm nor excuse it. To reduce it, extract each cohesive step of the body — the runs of statements that work on the same values and would earn the same name — into its own named unit, and have this one call them in order.
MethodTooLong: ComplexEnum.tagged_variant_tokens crates/oapi-macros/src/schema/enum_schemas.rs:727 — MethodTooLong — tagged_variant_tokens runs 152 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded, and inline test code — #[cfg(test)] modules and bare #[test] functions — not counted) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 52 over it, 1.52× the bar. This is length, not branching: a long straight-line body scores low on complexity and is still read whole to change any part of it, so the complexity numbers beside this row neither confirm nor excuse it. To reduce it, extract each cohesive step of the body — the runs of statements that work on the same values and would earn the same name — into its own named unit, and have this one call them in order.
MethodTooLong: ToParameters.try_to_tokens crates/oapi-macros/src/parameter/derive.rs:64 — MethodTooLong — try_to_tokens runs 143 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded, and inline test code — #[cfg(test)] modules and bare #[test] functions — not counted) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 43 over it, 1.43× the bar. This is length, not branching: a long straight-line body scores low on complexity and is still read whole to change any part of it, so the complexity numbers beside this row neither confirm nor excuse it. To reduce it, extract each cohesive step of the body — the runs of statements that work on the same values and would earn the same name — into its own named unit, and have this one call them in order.
MethodTooLong: RequestDeserializer.fill_value crates/core/src/serde/request.rs:267 — MethodTooLong — fill_value runs 142 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded, and inline test code — #[cfg(test)] modules and bare #[test] functions — not counted) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 42 over it, 1.42× the bar. This is length, not branching: a long straight-line body scores low on complexity and is still read whole to change any part of it, so the complexity numbers beside this row neither confirm nor excuse it. To reduce it, extract each cohesive step of the body — the runs of statements that work on the same values and would earn the same name — into its own named unit, and have this one call them in order.
MethodTooLong: ComplexEnum.adjacently_tagged_variant_tokens crates/oapi-macros/src/schema/enum_schemas.rs:932 — MethodTooLong — adjacently_tagged_variant_tokens runs 132 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded, and inline test code — #[cfg(test)] modules and bare #[test] functions — not counted) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 32 over it, 1.32× the bar. This is length, not branching: a long straight-line body scores low on complexity and is still read whole to change any part of it, so the complexity numbers beside this row neither confirm nor excuse it. To reduce it, extract each cohesive step of the body — the runs of statements that work on the same values and would earn the same name — into its own named unit, and have this one call them in order.
MethodTooLong: EnumSchema.new crates/oapi-macros/src/schema/enum_schemas.rs:44 — MethodTooLong — new runs 131 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded, and inline test code — #[cfg(test)] modules and bare #[test] functions — not counted) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 31 over it, 1.31× the bar. This is length, not branching: a long straight-line body scores low on complexity and is still read whole to change any part of it, so the complexity numbers beside this row neither confirm nor excuse it. To reduce it, extract each cohesive step of the body — the runs of statements that work on the same values and would earn the same name — into its own named unit, and have this one call them in order.
MethodTooLong: NamedFile.send_inner crates/core/src/fs/named_file.rs:812 — MethodTooLong — send_inner runs 124 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded, and inline test code — #[cfg(test)] modules and bare #[test] functions — not counted) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 24 over it, 1.24× the bar. This is length, not branching: a long straight-line body scores low on complexity and is still read whole to change any part of it, so the complexity numbers beside this row neither confirm nor excuse it. To reduce it, extract each cohesive step of the body — the runs of statements that work on the same values and would earn the same name — into its own named unit, and have this one call them in order.
MethodTooLong: ComplexEnum.variant_tokens crates/oapi-macros/src/schema/enum_schemas.rs:499 — MethodTooLong — variant_tokens runs 116 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded, and inline test code — #[cfg(test)] modules and bare #[test] functions — not counted) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 16 over it, 1.16× the bar. This is length, not branching: a long straight-line body scores low on complexity and is still read whole to change any part of it, so the complexity numbers beside this row neither confirm nor excuse it. To reduce it, extract each cohesive step of the body — the runs of statements that work on the same values and would earn the same name — into its own named unit, and have this one call them in order.
MethodTooLong: ToSchema.try_to_tokens crates/oapi-macros/src/schema.rs:75 — MethodTooLong — try_to_tokens runs 115 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded, and inline test code — #[cfg(test)] modules and bare #[test] functions — not counted) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 15 over it, 1.15× the bar. This is length, not branching: a long straight-line body scores low on complexity and is still read whole to change any part of it, so the complexity numbers beside this row neither confirm nor excuse it. To reduce it, extract each cohesive step of the body — the runs of statements that work on the same values and would earn the same name — into its own named unit, and have this one call them in order.
MethodTooLong: NamedFileBuilder.build crates/core/src/fs/named_file.rs:325 — MethodTooLong — build runs 102 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded, and inline test code — #[cfg(test)] modules and bare #[test] functions — not counted) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 2 over it, 1.02× the bar. This is length, not branching: a long straight-line body scores low on complexity and is still read whole to change any part of it, so the complexity numbers beside this row neither confirm nor excuse it. To reduce it, extract each cohesive step of the body — the runs of statements that work on the same values and would earn the same name — into its own named unit, and have this one call them in order.
MethodTooLong: Builder.serve_connection crates/core/src/conn/quinn/builder.rs:102 — MethodTooLong — serve_connection runs 101 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded, and inline test code — #[cfg(test)] modules and bare #[test] functions — not counted) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 1 over it, 1.01× the bar. This is length, not branching: a long straight-line body scores low on complexity and is still read whole to change any part of it, so the complexity numbers beside this row neither confirm nor excuse it. To reduce it, extract each cohesive step of the body — the runs of statements that work on the same values and would earn the same name — into its own named unit, and have this one call them in order.
MethodTooLong: UnnamedStructSchema.try_to_tokens crates/oapi-macros/src/schema/struct_schemas.rs:531 — MethodTooLong — try_to_tokens runs 101 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded, and inline test code — #[cfg(test)] modules and bare #[test] functions — not counted) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 1 over it, 1.01× the bar. This is length, not branching: a long straight-line body scores low on complexity and is still read whole to change any part of it, so the complexity numbers beside this row neither confirm nor excuse it. To reduce it, extract each cohesive step of the body — the runs of statements that work on the same values and would earn the same name — into its own named unit, and have this one call them in order.

D3 · God Classes · FileTooLong · ×11

FileTooLong: schema/enum_schemas.rs crates/oapi-macros/src/schema/enum_schemas.rs — FileTooLong — 897 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded, and inline test code — #[cfg(test)] modules and bare #[test] functions — not counted), about 60% of them inside a single declaration: ComplexEnum (3 blocks, 480-1185). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 397 over it, 1.79× the bar. Moving the declarations that sit BESIDE it into sibling files will not shorten this file. Extract from INSIDE that declaration instead: lift each cohesive group of its body — the parts that share the same inputs and are named together — into its own unit in a sibling file, and have the original call them.
FileTooLong: filters/path.rs crates/core/src/routing/filters/path.rs — FileTooLong — 802 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded, and inline test code — #[cfg(test)] modules and bare #[test] functions — not counted). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 302 over it, 1.60× the bar. To reduce it, split the file along the responsibilities already in it: move each cohesive group of declarations into its own sibling file in the same module or package, so no one file has to be read whole to change one of them.
FileTooLong: src/lib.rs crates/oapi/src/lib.rs — FileTooLong — 718 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded, and inline test code — #[cfg(test)] modules and bare #[test] functions — not counted). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 218 over it, 1.44× the bar. To reduce it, split the file along the responsibilities already in it: move each cohesive group of declarations into its own sibling file in the same module or package, so no one file has to be read whole to change one of them.
FileTooLong: http/request.rs crates/core/src/http/request.rs — FileTooLong — 672 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded, and inline test code — #[cfg(test)] modules and bare #[test] functions — not counted), about 91% of them inside a single declaration: Request (4 blocks, 157-1547). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 172 over it, 1.34× the bar. Moving the declarations that sit BESIDE it into sibling files will not shorten this file. Extract from INSIDE that declaration instead: lift each cohesive group of its body — the parts that share the same inputs and are named together — into its own unit in a sibling file, and have the original call them.
FileTooLong: src/dir.rs crates/serve-static/src/dir.rs — FileTooLong — 606 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded, and inline test code — #[cfg(test)] modules and bare #[test] functions — not counted). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 106 over it, 1.21× the bar. To reduce it, split the file along the responsibilities already in it: move each cohesive group of declarations into its own sibling file in the same module or package, so no one file has to be read whole to change one of them.
FileTooLong: feature/attributes.rs crates/oapi-macros/src/feature/attributes.rs — FileTooLong — 603 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded, and inline test code — #[cfg(test)] modules and bare #[test] functions — not counted). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 103 over it, 1.21× the bar. To reduce it, split the file along the responsibilities already in it: move each cohesive group of declarations into its own sibling file in the same module or package, so no one file has to be read whole to change one of them.
FileTooLong: fs/named_file.rs crates/core/src/fs/named_file.rs — FileTooLong — 596 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded, and inline test code — #[cfg(test)] modules and bare #[test] functions — not counted). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 96 over it, 1.19× the bar. To reduce it, split the file along the responsibilities already in it: move each cohesive group of declarations into its own sibling file in the same module or package, so no one file has to be read whole to change one of them.
FileTooLong: src/schema_type.rs crates/oapi-macros/src/schema_type.rs — FileTooLong — 570 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded, and inline test code — #[cfg(test)] modules and bare #[test] functions — not counted). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 70 over it, 1.14× the bar. To reduce it, split the file along the responsibilities already in it: move each cohesive group of declarations into its own sibling file in the same module or package, so no one file has to be read whole to change one of them.
FileTooLong: src/response.rs crates/oapi-macros/src/response.rs — FileTooLong — 567 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded, and inline test code — #[cfg(test)] modules and bare #[test] functions — not counted). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 67 over it, 1.13× the bar. To reduce it, split the file along the responsibilities already in it: move each cohesive group of declarations into its own sibling file in the same module or package, so no one file has to be read whole to change one of them.
FileTooLong: src/component.rs crates/oapi-macros/src/component.rs — FileTooLong — 552 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded, and inline test code — #[cfg(test)] modules and bare #[test] functions — not counted), about 88% of them inside a single declaration: ComponentSchema (3 blocks, 63-728). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 52 over it, 1.10× the bar. Moving the declarations that sit BESIDE it into sibling files will not shorten this file. Extract from INSIDE that declaration instead: lift each cohesive group of its body — the parts that share the same inputs and are named together — into its own unit in a sibling file, and have the original call them.
FileTooLong: src/openapi.rs crates/oapi/src/openapi.rs — FileTooLong — 506 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded, and inline test code — #[cfg(test)] modules and bare #[test] functions — not counted), about 67% of them inside a single declaration: OpenApi (3 blocks, 87-784). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 6 over it, 1.01× the bar. Moving the declarations that sit BESIDE it into sibling files will not shorten this file. Extract from INSIDE that declaration instead: lift each cohesive group of its body — the parts that share the same inputs and are named together — into its own unit in a sibling file, and have the original call them.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (5 lines × 2) · ×9

Duplicated block (5 lines × 2) crates/oapi/src/openapi/path.rs:158 — crates/oapi/src/openapi/path.rs:158-162 | crates/oapi/src/openapi/security.rs:613-617 — 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) crates/oapi/src/rapidoc.rs:118 — crates/oapi/src/rapidoc.rs:118-122 | crates/oapi/src/redoc.rs:133-137 — 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) crates/tus/src/stores/disk.rs:481 — crates/tus/src/stores/disk.rs:481-485 | crates/tus/src/stores/disk.rs:487-491 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
Duplicated block (5 lines × 2) crates/tus/src/handlers/patch.rs:180 — crates/tus/src/handlers/patch.rs:180-184 | crates/tus/src/handlers/post.rs:198-202 — 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) crates/core/src/conn/openssl/config.rs:42 — crates/core/src/conn/openssl/config.rs:42-46 | crates/core/src/conn/rustls/config.rs:57-61 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice.
Duplicated block (5 lines × 2) crates/cors/src/allow_credentials.rs:50 — crates/cors/src/allow_credentials.rs:50-54 | crates/cors/src/allow_private_network.rs:49-53 — 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) crates/cors/src/allow_headers.rs:71 — crates/cors/src/allow_headers.rs:71-75 | crates/cors/src/allow_methods.rs:83-87 — 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) crates/cors/src/expose_headers.rs:70 — crates/cors/src/expose_headers.rs:70-74 | crates/cors/src/max_age.rs:54-58 — 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) crates/macros/src/handler.rs:156 — crates/macros/src/handler.rs:156-160 | crates/macros/src/handler.rs:175-179 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (9 lines × 2) · ×8

Duplicated block (9 lines × 2) crates/core/src/conn/stream/handshake.rs:55 — crates/core/src/conn/stream/handshake.rs:55-63 | crates/core/src/conn/stream/handshake.rs:73-81 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
Duplicated block (9 lines × 2) crates/core/src/server.rs:347 — crates/core/src/server.rs:347-355 | crates/core/src/server.rs:518-526 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
Duplicated block (9 lines × 2) crates/oapi/src/openapi.rs:888 — crates/oapi/src/openapi.rs:888-896 | crates/oapi/src/openapi.rs:944-952 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
Duplicated block (9 lines × 2) crates/oapi-macros/src/schema/enum_variant.rs:210 — crates/oapi-macros/src/schema/enum_variant.rs:210-218 | crates/oapi-macros/src/schema/enum_variant.rs:309-317 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
Duplicated block (9 lines × 2) crates/oapi-macros/src/schema/struct_schemas.rs:94 — crates/oapi-macros/src/schema/struct_schemas.rs:94-102 | crates/oapi-macros/src/schema/struct_schemas.rs:186-194 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
Duplicated block (9 lines × 2) crates/rate-limiter/src/lib.rs:344 — crates/rate-limiter/src/lib.rs:344-352 | crates/rate-limiter/src/lib.rs:372-380 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
Duplicated block (9 lines × 2) crates/oapi/src/openapi/schema/object.rs:275 — crates/oapi/src/openapi/schema/object.rs:275-283 | crates/oapi/src/swagger_ui/config.rs:635-644 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice.
Duplicated block (9 lines × 2) crates/oapi-macros/src/operation/encoding.rs:23 — crates/oapi-macros/src/operation/encoding.rs:23-32 | crates/oapi-macros/src/server.rs:20-28 — 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.

D15 · Churn × Complexity Hotspots · Hotspot · ×6

Hotspot: crates/serve-static/src/dir.rs crates/serve-static/src/dir.rs:486 — crates/serve-static/src/dir.rs changed 7 times in last 90 days, and the most complex body those changes touched has cyclomatic complexity 56 in StaticDir::handle at line 486. 2 of those changes were fix/bug commits, and the other 5 changed it for other reasons — this file is under both repair and feature pressure. Before the next change lands here, make sure the area it touches is under test, then split that area out of the file so the following change is smaller than this one — a file this often edited pays the complexity back every time. Counted over 2026-06-26..2026-09-24, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-06-26 15:34:04 +08:00' --until='2026-09-24 15:34:04 +08:00' --full-history --no-merges -- crates/serve-static/src/dir.rs`: merges are excluded because a merge re-states changes already counted at their own commits, and history is NOT path-simplified because a change that reached the file through a merged branch is still a change to it. That command counts raw commits and can read HIGHER than this row, which counts a cherry-picked re-land, and a revert together with the commit it undoes, once each — a difference of several commits on a file whose history was re-landed or reverted inside the window.
Hotspot: crates/core/src/service.rs crates/core/src/service.rs:258 — crates/core/src/service.rs changed 4 times in last 90 days, and the most complex body those changes touched has cyclomatic complexity 29 in HyperHandler::handle at line 258. Frequent change and high complexity in one file compound: schedule the next change to it to include carving out the part being edited, with the area under test before it moves. Counted over 2026-06-26..2026-09-24, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-06-26 15:34:04 +08:00' --until='2026-09-24 15:34:04 +08:00' --full-history --no-merges -- crates/core/src/service.rs`: merges are excluded because a merge re-states changes already counted at their own commits, and history is NOT path-simplified because a change that reached the file through a merged branch is still a change to it. That command counts raw commits and can read HIGHER than this row, which counts a cherry-picked re-land, and a revert together with the commit it undoes, once each — a difference of several commits on a file whose history was re-landed or reverted inside the window.
Hotspot: crates/core/src/fs/named_file.rs crates/core/src/fs/named_file.rs:812 — crates/core/src/fs/named_file.rs changed 3 times in last 90 days, and the most complex body those changes touched has cyclomatic complexity 31 in NamedFile::send_inner at line 812. Frequent change and high complexity in one file compound: schedule the next change to it to include carving out the part being edited, with the area under test before it moves. Counted over 2026-06-26..2026-09-24, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-06-26 15:34:04 +08:00' --until='2026-09-24 15:34:04 +08:00' --full-history --no-merges -- crates/core/src/fs/named_file.rs`: merges are excluded because a merge re-states changes already counted at their own commits, and history is NOT path-simplified because a change that reached the file through a merged branch is still a change to it. That command counts raw commits and can read HIGHER than this row, which counts a cherry-picked re-land, and a revert together with the commit it undoes, once each — a difference of several commits on a file whose history was re-landed or reverted inside the window.
Hotspot: crates/oapi-macros/src/endpoint/attr.rs crates/oapi-macros/src/endpoint/attr.rs:29 — crates/oapi-macros/src/endpoint/attr.rs changed 3 times in last 90 days, and the most complex body those changes touched has cyclomatic complexity 19 in EndpointAttr::parse at line 29. Frequent change and high complexity in one file compound: schedule the next change to it to include carving out the part being edited, with the area under test before it moves. Counted over 2026-06-26..2026-09-24, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-06-26 15:34:04 +08:00' --until='2026-09-24 15:34:04 +08:00' --full-history --no-merges -- crates/oapi-macros/src/endpoint/attr.rs`: merges are excluded because a merge re-states changes already counted at their own commits, and history is NOT path-simplified because a change that reached the file through a merged branch is still a change to it. That command counts raw commits and can read HIGHER than this row, which counts a cherry-picked re-land, and a revert together with the commit it undoes, once each — a difference of several commits on a file whose history was re-landed or reverted inside the window.
Hotspot: crates/oapi-macros/src/parameter/derive.rs crates/oapi-macros/src/parameter/derive.rs:64 — crates/oapi-macros/src/parameter/derive.rs changed 3 times in last 90 days, and the most complex body those changes touched has cyclomatic complexity 18 in ToParameters::try_to_tokens at line 64. 1 of those changes was a fix/bug commit, and the other 2 changed it for other reasons — this file is under both repair and feature pressure. Before the next change lands here, make sure the area it touches is under test, then split that area out of the file so the following change is smaller than this one — a file this often edited pays the complexity back every time. Counted over 2026-06-26..2026-09-24, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-06-26 15:34:04 +08:00' --until='2026-09-24 15:34:04 +08:00' --full-history --no-merges -- crates/oapi-macros/src/parameter/derive.rs`: merges are excluded because a merge re-states changes already counted at their own commits, and history is NOT path-simplified because a change that reached the file through a merged branch is still a change to it. That command counts raw commits and can read HIGHER than this row, which counts a cherry-picked re-land, and a revert together with the commit it undoes, once each — a difference of several commits on a file whose history was re-landed or reverted inside the window.
Hotspot: crates/core/src/routing/filters/path.rs crates/core/src/routing/filters/path.rs:432 — crates/core/src/routing/filters/path.rs changed 3 times in last 90 days, and the most complex body those changes touched has cyclomatic complexity 18 in CombWisp::detect at line 432. 1 of those changes was a fix/bug commit, and the other 2 changed it for other reasons — this file is under both repair and feature pressure. Before the next change lands here, make sure the area it touches is under test, then split that area out of the file so the following change is smaller than this one — a file this often edited pays the complexity back every time. Counted over 2026-06-26..2026-09-24, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-06-26 15:34:04 +08:00' --until='2026-09-24 15:34:04 +08:00' --full-history --no-merges -- crates/core/src/routing/filters/path.rs`: merges are excluded because a merge re-states changes already counted at their own commits, and history is NOT path-simplified because a change that reached the file through a merged branch is still a change to it. That command counts raw commits and can read HIGHER than this row, which counts a cherry-picked re-land, and a revert together with the commit it undoes, once each — a difference of several commits on a file whose history was re-landed or reverted inside the window.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (8 lines × 2) · ×6

Duplicated block (8 lines × 2) crates/core/src/conn/tcp.rs:199 — crates/core/src/conn/tcp.rs:199-206 | crates/core/src/conn/unix.rs:126-133 — 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 (8 lines × 2) crates/core/src/http/body/req.rs:165 — crates/core/src/http/body/req.rs:165-172 | crates/core/src/http/body/res.rs:156-163 — 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 (8 lines × 2) crates/macros/src/handler.rs:131 — crates/macros/src/handler.rs:131-138 | crates/oapi-macros/src/endpoint.rs:299-306 — before extracting anything, compare `crates/macros/src/handler.rs` and `crates/oapi-macros/src/endpoint.rs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 5 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 67 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 (8 lines × 2) crates/oapi/src/openapi/response.rs:42 — crates/oapi/src/openapi/response.rs:42-49 | crates/oapi/src/openapi/schema.rs:48-55 — the copies sit in sibling files of one directory, so a shared home is within easy reach: extract the block into a single shared function the call sites can all reach — a file they already depend on, or a new one alongside them — and call it from both call sites, so a change lands once.
Duplicated block (8 lines × 2) crates/cors/src/allow_headers.rs:98 — crates/cors/src/allow_headers.rs:98-105 | crates/cors/src/allow_methods.rs:110-117 — 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 (8 lines × 2) crates/core/src/routing/filters/others.rs:149 — crates/core/src/routing/filters/others.rs:149-156 | crates/core/src/routing/filters/others.rs:212-219 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (7 lines × 2) · ×6

Duplicated block (7 lines × 2) crates/oapi-macros/src/operation/request_body.rs:76 — crates/oapi-macros/src/operation/request_body.rs:76-82 | crates/oapi-macros/src/schema/xml.rs:35-41 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice.
Duplicated block (7 lines × 2) crates/session/src/lib.rs:140 — crates/session/src/lib.rs:140-146 | crates/session/src/lib.rs:368-374 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
Duplicated block (7 lines × 2) crates/core/src/serde/flat_value.rs:121 — crates/core/src/serde/flat_value.rs:121-127 | crates/core/src/serde/vec_value.rs:112-118 — the copies sit in sibling files of one directory, so a shared home is within easy reach: extract the block into a single shared function the call sites can all reach — a file they already depend on, or a new one alongside them — and call it from both call sites, so a change lands once.
Duplicated block (7 lines × 2) crates/cors/src/allow_headers.rs:139 — crates/cors/src/allow_headers.rs:139-145 | crates/cors/src/expose_headers.rs:122-128 — the copies sit in sibling files of one directory, so a shared home is within easy reach: extract the block into a single shared function the call sites can all reach — a file they already depend on, or a new one alongside them — and call it from both call sites, so a change lands once.
Duplicated block (7 lines × 2) crates/cors/src/allow_headers.rs:148 — crates/cors/src/allow_headers.rs:148-154 | crates/cors/src/expose_headers.rs:131-137 — the copies sit in sibling files of one directory, so a shared home is within easy reach: extract the block into a single shared function the call sites can all reach — a file they already depend on, or a new one alongside them — and call it from both call sites, so a change lands once.
Duplicated block (7 lines × 2) crates/macros/src/handler.rs:107 — crates/macros/src/handler.rs:107-113 | crates/oapi-macros/src/endpoint.rs:273-279 — before extracting anything, compare `crates/macros/src/handler.rs` and `crates/oapi-macros/src/endpoint.rs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 5 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 67 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 (12 lines × 2) · ×5

Duplicated block (12 lines × 2) crates/core/src/server.rs:358 — crates/core/src/server.rs:358-369 | crates/core/src/server.rs:529-540 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
Duplicated block (12 lines × 2) crates/oapi-macros/src/response.rs:259 — crates/oapi-macros/src/response.rs:259-270 | crates/oapi-macros/src/response.rs:277-288 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
Duplicated block (12 lines × 2) crates/oapi-macros/src/schema/struct_schemas.rs:252 — crates/oapi-macros/src/schema/struct_schemas.rs:252-263 | crates/oapi-macros/src/schema/struct_schemas.rs:435-446 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
Duplicated block (12 lines × 2) crates/oapi-macros/src/schema.rs:288 — crates/oapi-macros/src/schema.rs:288-299 | crates/oapi-macros/src/schema.rs:322-333 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
Duplicated block (12 lines × 2) crates/tus/src/handlers/patch.rs:192 — crates/tus/src/handlers/patch.rs:192-203 | crates/tus/src/handlers/post.rs:212-223 — the copies sit in sibling files of one directory, so a shared home is within easy reach: extract the block into a single shared function the call sites can all reach — a file they already depend on, or a new one alongside them — and call it from both call sites, so a change lands once.

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

Duplicated block (11 lines × 2) crates/macros/src/shared.rs:34 — crates/macros/src/shared.rs:34-44 | crates/oapi-macros/src/shared.rs:56-66 — before extracting anything, compare `crates/macros/src/shared.rs` and `crates/oapi-macros/src/shared.rs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 5 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 87 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 (11 lines × 2) crates/oapi/src/openapi/schema/all_of.rs:58 — crates/oapi/src/openapi/schema/all_of.rs:58-68 | crates/oapi/src/openapi/schema/one_of.rs:58-68 — 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 (11 lines × 2) crates/oapi/src/rapidoc.rs:105 — crates/oapi/src/rapidoc.rs:105-115 | crates/oapi/src/redoc.rs:120-130 — 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 (11 lines × 2) crates/oapi-macros/src/schema/enum_schemas.rs:303 — crates/oapi-macros/src/schema/enum_schemas.rs:303-313 | crates/oapi-macros/src/schema/enum_schemas.rs:381-391 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
Duplicated block (11 lines × 2) crates/core/src/conn/proto.rs:170 — crates/core/src/conn/proto.rs:170-182 | crates/core/src/conn/proto.rs:232-242 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (10 lines × 2) · ×5

Duplicated block (10 lines × 2) crates/core/src/conn/quinn/builder.rs:135 — crates/core/src/conn/quinn/builder.rs:135-144 | crates/core/src/conn/quinn/builder.rs:159-168 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
Duplicated block (10 lines × 2) crates/core/src/extract/case.rs:115 — crates/core/src/extract/case.rs:115-124 | crates/serde-util/src/case.rs:150-159 — before extracting anything, compare `crates/core/src/extract/case.rs` and `crates/serde-util/src/case.rs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 3 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 41 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 (10 lines × 2) crates/core/src/http/request.rs:568 — crates/core/src/http/request.rs:568-577 | crates/core/src/http/response.rs:183-192 — 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 (10 lines × 2) crates/csrf/src/aes_gcm_cipher.rs:74 — crates/csrf/src/aes_gcm_cipher.rs:74-83 | crates/csrf/src/ccp_cipher.rs:74-83 — 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 (10 lines × 2) crates/macros/src/shared.rs:45 — crates/macros/src/shared.rs:45-54 | crates/oapi-macros/src/shared.rs:67-76 — before extracting anything, compare `crates/macros/src/shared.rs` and `crates/oapi-macros/src/shared.rs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 5 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 87 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.

D6 · Cohesion (LCOM4) · Low cohesion · ×5

Low cohesion: OpenApi (LCOM4 7) crates/oapi/src/openapi.rs:87 — OpenApi's methods fall into 7 groups that share no field and call none of each other, against a bar of more than 3 for this run (LCOM4, configurable — your repository's bar is the one quoted here). Each group is a set of methods reachable from one another through shared fields or direct calls, so 7 groups means the type has that many internally-connected clusters with nothing tying them together. Types whose shape makes a high count expected — and which would otherwise dominate this list — are excluded before this row is raised, so this is a genuine split candidate rather than a metric reading. It is still a shape, not a defect: confirm the groups match responsibilities you can name before splitting.
Low cohesion: EncodeStream (LCOM4 6) crates/compression/src/stream.rs:19 — EncodeStream's methods fall into 6 groups that share no field and call none of each other, against a bar of more than 3 for this run (LCOM4, configurable — your repository's bar is the one quoted here). Each group is a set of methods reachable from one another through shared fields or direct calls, so 6 groups means the type has that many internally-connected clusters with nothing tying them together. Types whose shape makes a high count expected — and which would otherwise dominate this list — are excluded before this row is raised, so this is a genuine split candidate rather than a metric reading. It is still a shape, not a defect: confirm the groups match responsibilities you can name before splitting.
Low cohesion: Router (LCOM4 6) crates/core/src/routing/router.rs:15 — Router's methods fall into 6 groups that share no field and call none of each other, against a bar of more than 3 for this run (LCOM4, configurable — your repository's bar is the one quoted here). Each group is a set of methods reachable from one another through shared fields or direct calls, so 6 groups means the type has that many internally-connected clusters with nothing tying them together. Types whose shape makes a high count expected — and which would otherwise dominate this list — are excluded before this row is raised, so this is a genuine split candidate rather than a metric reading. It is still a shape, not a defect: confirm the groups match responsibilities you can name before splitting.
Low cohesion: DynStream (LCOM4 4) crates/core/src/conn.rs:506 — DynStream's methods fall into 4 groups that share no field and call none of each other, against a bar of more than 3 for this run (LCOM4, configurable — your repository's bar is the one quoted here). Each group is a set of methods reachable from one another through shared fields or direct calls, so 4 groups means the type has that many internally-connected clusters with nothing tying them together. Types whose shape makes a high count expected — and which would otherwise dominate this list — are excluded before this row is raised, so this is a genuine split candidate rather than a metric reading. It is still a shape, not a defect: confirm the groups match responsibilities you can name before splitting.
Low cohesion: Cors (LCOM4 4) crates/cors/src/lib.rs:107 — Cors's methods fall into 4 groups that share no field and call none of each other, against a bar of more than 3 for this run (LCOM4, configurable — your repository's bar is the one quoted here). Each group is a set of methods reachable from one another through shared fields or direct calls, so 4 groups means the type has that many internally-connected clusters with nothing tying them together. Types whose shape makes a high count expected — and which would otherwise dominate this list — are excluded before this row is raised, so this is a genuine split candidate rather than a metric reading. It is still a shape, not a defect: confirm the groups match responsibilities you can name before splitting.

D3 · God Classes · TooManyMethods · ×4

TooManyMethods: Request crates/core/src/http/request.rs:157 — TooManyMethods — 72 methods. The bar is 30 methods; this is 42 over it, 2.40× 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: Router crates/core/src/routing/router.rs:15 — TooManyMethods — 41 methods. The bar is 30 methods; this is 11 over it, 1.37× 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: OpenApi crates/oapi/src/openapi.rs:87 — TooManyMethods — 32 methods. The bar is 30 methods; this is 2 over it, 1.07× 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: Object crates/oapi/src/openapi/schema/object.rs:19 — TooManyMethods — 32 methods. The bar is 30 methods; this is 2 over it, 1.07× the bar. To reduce it, group the members that share the same data into a smaller type of their own and delegate to it, so no single type carries every responsibility.

D3 · God Classes · FunctionTooLong · ×4

FunctionTooLong: salvo_tus::handlers::post::create crates/tus/src/handlers/post.rs:21 — FunctionTooLong — salvo_tus::handlers::post::create runs 208 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded, and inline test code — #[cfg(test)] modules and bare #[test] functions — not counted) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 108 over it, 2.08× the bar. This is length, not branching: a long straight-line body scores low on complexity and is still read whole to change any part of it, so the complexity numbers beside this row neither confirm nor excuse it. To reduce it, extract each cohesive step of the body — the runs of statements that work on the same values and would earn the same name — into its own named unit, and have this one call them in order.
FunctionTooLong: salvo_tus::handlers::patch::patch crates/tus/src/handlers/patch.rs:17 — FunctionTooLong — salvo_tus::handlers::patch::patch runs 156 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded, and inline test code — #[cfg(test)] modules and bare #[test] functions — not counted) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 56 over it, 1.56× the bar. This is length, not branching: a long straight-line body scores low on complexity and is still read whole to change any part of it, so the complexity numbers beside this row neither confirm nor excuse it. To reduce it, extract each cohesive step of the body — the runs of statements that work on the same values and would earn the same name — into its own named unit, and have this one call them in order.
FunctionTooLong: salvo_macros::extract::generate crates/macros/src/extract.rs:274 — FunctionTooLong — salvo_macros::extract::generate runs 138 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded, and inline test code — #[cfg(test)] modules and bare #[test] functions — not counted) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 38 over it, 1.38× the bar. This is length, not branching: a long straight-line body scores low on complexity and is still read whole to change any part of it, so the complexity numbers beside this row neither confirm nor excuse it. To reduce it, extract each cohesive step of the body — the runs of statements that work on the same values and would earn the same name — into its own named unit, and have this one call them in order.
FunctionTooLong: salvo_oapi_macros::bound::with_bound crates/oapi-macros/src/bound.rs:57 — FunctionTooLong — salvo_oapi_macros::bound::with_bound runs 121 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded, and inline test code — #[cfg(test)] modules and bare #[test] functions — not counted) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 21 over it, 1.21× the bar. This is length, not branching: a long straight-line body scores low on complexity and is still read whole to change any part of it, so the complexity numbers beside this row neither confirm nor excuse it. To reduce it, extract each cohesive step of the body — the runs of statements that work on the same values and would earn the same name — into its own named unit, and have this one call them in order.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (14 lines × 2) · ×4

Duplicated block (14 lines × 2) crates/macros/src/handler.rs:51 — crates/macros/src/handler.rs:51-64 | crates/oapi-macros/src/endpoint.rs:210-223 — before extracting anything, compare `crates/macros/src/handler.rs` and `crates/oapi-macros/src/endpoint.rs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 5 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 67 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 (14 lines × 2) crates/macros/src/handler.rs:89 — crates/macros/src/handler.rs:89-102 | crates/oapi-macros/src/endpoint.rs:259-272 — before extracting anything, compare `crates/macros/src/handler.rs` and `crates/oapi-macros/src/endpoint.rs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 5 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 67 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 (14 lines × 2) crates/core/src/fs/named_file.rs:1043 — crates/core/src/fs/named_file.rs:1043-1056 | crates/core/src/writing/seek.rs:183-196 — before extracting anything, compare `crates/core/src/fs/named_file.rs` and `crates/core/src/writing/seek.rs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 4 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 59 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 (14 lines × 2) crates/core/src/fs/named_file.rs:1059 — crates/core/src/fs/named_file.rs:1059-1072 | crates/core/src/writing/seek.rs:199-212 — before extracting anything, compare `crates/core/src/fs/named_file.rs` and `crates/core/src/writing/seek.rs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 4 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 59 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 (7 lines × 3) · ×4

Duplicated block (7 lines × 3) crates/core/src/catcher.rs:345 — crates/core/src/catcher.rs:345-351 | crates/oapi/src/html.rs:2-8 | crates/serve-static/src/dir.rs:772-778 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere all 3 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 3 times.
Duplicated block (7 lines × 3) crates/core/src/conn/native_tls/listener.rs:154 — crates/core/src/conn/native_tls/listener.rs:154-160 | crates/core/src/conn/openssl/listener.rs:141-147 | crates/core/src/conn/rustls/listener.rs:143-149 — `crates/core/src/conn/native_tls/listener.rs` and `crates/core/src/conn/openssl/listener.rs` are one unit implemented once per sibling directory, so they are most likely parallel implementations of one contract rather than a copy of each other — this scan matched 4 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 46 lines. If both are selected at run time, neither can be retired in favour of the other, and the lines that DIFFER between them are the reason both exist. The move that pays here is to hoist the identical part into a shared location the whole family can reach and give what differs a parameter or a seam, so a change lands once instead of once per sibling; extracting one helper per block leaves every sibling to drift on its own.
Duplicated block (7 lines × 3) crates/oapi/src/openapi/callback.rs:80 — crates/oapi/src/openapi/callback.rs:80-86 | crates/oapi/src/openapi/response.rs:28-35 | crates/oapi/src/openapi/schema.rs:34-41 — 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 all 3 call sites, so a change lands once.
Duplicated block (7 lines × 3) crates/oapi/src/openapi.rs:407 — crates/oapi/src/openapi.rs:407-413 | crates/oapi/src/openapi/operation.rs:312-318 | crates/oapi/src/openapi/parameter.rs:375-381 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere all 3 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 3 times.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (6 lines × 2) · ×4

Duplicated block (6 lines × 2) crates/macros/src/handler.rs:163 — crates/macros/src/handler.rs:163-168 | crates/macros/src/handler.rs:182-187 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
Duplicated block (6 lines × 2) crates/oapi/src/openapi/path.rs:70 — crates/oapi/src/openapi/path.rs:70-75 | crates/oapi/src/openapi/schema.rs:101-106 — the copies sit in sibling files of one directory, so a shared home is within easy reach: extract the block into a single shared function the call sites can all reach — a file they already depend on, or a new one alongside them — and call it from both call sites, so a change lands once.
Duplicated block (6 lines × 2) crates/session/src/lib.rs:134 — crates/session/src/lib.rs:134-139 | crates/session/src/lib.rs:362-367 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
Duplicated block (6 lines × 2) crates/core/src/conn/native_tls/listener.rs:64 — crates/core/src/conn/native_tls/listener.rs:64-69 | crates/core/src/conn/quinn/listener.rs:73-78 — 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.

D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · salvo_tus · ×3

salvo_tus::handlers::post::create (cyclomatic 65) crates/tus/src/handlers/post.rs:21 — salvo_tus::handlers::post::create has cyclomatic complexity 65 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
salvo_tus::handlers::patch::patch (cyclomatic 40) crates/tus/src/handlers/patch.rs:17 — salvo_tus::handlers::patch::patch has cyclomatic complexity 40 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
salvo_tus::handlers::head::head (cyclomatic 19) crates/tus/src/handlers/head.rs:15 — salvo_tus::handlers::head::head has cyclomatic complexity 19 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · RequestDeserializer · ×3

RequestDeserializer::fill_value (cognitive 183) crates/core/src/serde/request.rs:267 — RequestDeserializer::fill_value has cognitive complexity 183 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 38 (132 pts), loops 9 (41 pts), match/switch 3 (10 pts) (nesting depth added 133). 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.
RequestDeserializer::deserialize_value (cognitive 20) crates/core/src/serde/request.rs:189 — RequestDeserializer::deserialize_value has cognitive complexity 20 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 10 (16 pts), boolean chains 2, match/switch 1 (2 pts) (nesting depth added 7). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
RequestDeserializer::real_parser (cognitive 16) crates/core/src/serde/request.rs:167 — RequestDeserializer::real_parser has cognitive complexity 16 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 8 (14 pts), boolean chains 2 (nesting depth added 6). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · salvo_tus · ×3

salvo_tus::handlers::post::create (cognitive 99) crates/tus/src/handlers/post.rs:21 — salvo_tus::handlers::post::create has cognitive complexity 99 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 33 (55 pts), match/switch 13 (24 pts), boolean chains 16, loops 1 (4 pts) (nesting depth added 36). 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.
salvo_tus::handlers::patch::patch (cognitive 57) crates/tus/src/handlers/patch.rs:17 — salvo_tus::handlers::patch::patch has cognitive complexity 57 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 25 (39 pts), match/switch 11 (16 pts), boolean chains 2 (nesting depth added 19). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
salvo_tus::handlers::head::head (cognitive 26) crates/tus/src/handlers/head.rs:15 — salvo_tus::handlers::head::head has cognitive complexity 26 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 14 (20 pts), match/switch 4 (5 pts), boolean chains 1 (nesting depth added 7). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · PathParser · ×3

PathParser::scan_wisps (cognitive 73) crates/core/src/routing/filters/path.rs:828 — PathParser::scan_wisps has cognitive complexity 73 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 26 (66 pts), loops 2 (6 pts), boolean chains 1 (nesting depth added 44). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: this score is depth rather than breadth — most of its points come from checks stacked inside one another, so the work sits several levels in. Invert each enclosing check into an early exit (a return, or the language's equivalent) so the happy path stays at one level, and where a level cannot be exited early, lift the block it encloses into its own named function.
PathParser::scan_regex (cognitive 17) crates/core/src/routing/filters/path.rs:745 — PathParser::scan_regex has cognitive complexity 17 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 7 (13 pts), boolean chains 3, loops 1 (nesting depth added 6). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
PathParser::validate (cognitive 16) crates/core/src/routing/filters/path.rs:976 — PathParser::validate has cognitive complexity 16 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 6 (11 pts), boolean chains 2, match/switch 1 (2 pts), loops 1 (nesting depth added 6). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · salvo_oapi_macros · ×3

salvo_oapi_macros::bound::with_bound (cognitive 38) crates/oapi-macros/src/bound.rs:57 — salvo_oapi_macros::bound::with_bound has cognitive complexity 38 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: loops 10 (20 pts), match/switch 6 (8 pts), if/else 5 (7 pts), boolean chains 3 (nesting depth added 14). To reduce it, break up the iteration: give each loop body a named function, and split a multi-phase loop into one function per phase so no single body carries the whole pipeline.
salvo_oapi_macros::shared::parse_input_type (cognitive 18) crates/oapi-macros/src/shared.rs:55 — salvo_oapi_macros::shared::parse_input_type has cognitive complexity 18 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 12 (18 pts) (nesting depth added 6). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
salvo_oapi_macros::endpoint::generate (cognitive 17) crates/oapi-macros/src/endpoint.rs:133 — salvo_oapi_macros::endpoint::generate has cognitive complexity 17 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 7 (13 pts), loops 1 (2 pts), boolean chains 1, match/switch 1 (nesting depth added 7). The drivers above price the dispatch low by construction — a dispatch is charged once however many cases it lists, while each branch inside an arm is charged in full — so most of this count is what the case bodies hold, and the arms are where it can be reduced. To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Keep every case explicit, and make the behaviour for cases you do not list a deliberate choice rather than an accident.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · StraightStream · ×3

StraightStream::poll_write (cognitive 31) crates/core/src/conn/stream/straight.rs:116 — StraightStream::poll_write has cognitive complexity 31 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 9 (23 pts), match/switch 2 (5 pts), boolean chains 3 (nesting depth added 17). The drivers above price the dispatch low by construction — a dispatch is charged once however many cases it lists, while each branch inside an arm is charged in full — so most of this count is what the case bodies hold, and the arms are where it can be reduced. To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Keep every case explicit, and make the behaviour for cases you do not list a deliberate choice rather than an accident. This shape REPEATS in the file: one other method here (StraightStream::poll_write_vectored) has the same decision points, in the same order, at the same nesting depths — so this is one pattern written twice rather than two separate problems. Splitting this body alone leaves the other exactly as it is. Where these are variations on one operation, the change that clears both is the shared one: lift the common shape into a single routine the variants call, parameterised by whatever genuinely differs between them, and keep in each method only the part that is not shared.
StraightStream::poll_write_vectored (cognitive 31) crates/core/src/conn/stream/straight.rs:181 — StraightStream::poll_write_vectored has cognitive complexity 31 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 9 (23 pts), match/switch 2 (5 pts), boolean chains 3 (nesting depth added 17). The drivers above price the dispatch low by construction — a dispatch is charged once however many cases it lists, while each branch inside an arm is charged in full — so most of this count is what the case bodies hold, and the arms are where it can be reduced. To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Keep every case explicit, and make the behaviour for cases you do not list a deliberate choice rather than an accident. This shape REPEATS in the file: one other method here (StraightStream::poll_write) has the same decision points, in the same order, at the same nesting depths — so this is one pattern written twice rather than two separate problems. Splitting this body alone leaves the other exactly as it is. Where these are variations on one operation, the change that clears both is the shared one: lift the common shape into a single routine the variants call, parameterised by whatever genuinely differs between them, and keep in each method only the part that is not shared.
StraightStream::poll_read (cognitive 17) crates/core/src/conn/stream/straight.rs:73 — StraightStream::poll_read has cognitive complexity 17 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 5 (14 pts), boolean chains 2, match/switch 1 (nesting depth added 9). The drivers above price the dispatch low by construction — a dispatch is charged once however many cases it lists, while each branch inside an arm is charged in full — so most of this count is what the case bodies hold, and the arms are where it can be reduced. To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Keep every case explicit, and make the behaviour for cases you do not list a deliberate choice rather than an accident.

D3 · God Classes · ClassTooLong · ×3

ClassTooLong: Request crates/core/src/http/request.rs:157 — ClassTooLong — 609 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded, and inline test code — #[cfg(test)] modules and bare #[test] functions — not counted), 72 methods, 4 blocks, lines 157-1547. The bar is 400 significant lines; this is 209 over it, 1.52× the bar. To reduce it, group the members that share the same data into a smaller type of their own and delegate to it, so no single type carries every responsibility.
ClassTooLong: ComplexEnum crates/oapi-macros/src/schema/enum_schemas.rs:480 — ClassTooLong — 538 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded, and inline test code — #[cfg(test)] modules and bare #[test] functions — not counted), 6 methods, 3 blocks, lines 480-1185. The bar is 400 significant lines; this is 138 over it, 1.35× the bar. To reduce it, group the members that share the same data into a smaller type of their own and delegate to it, so no single type carries every responsibility.
ClassTooLong: ComponentSchema crates/oapi-macros/src/component.rs:63 — ClassTooLong — 486 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded, and inline test code — #[cfg(test)] modules and bare #[test] functions — not counted), 8 methods, 3 blocks, lines 63-728. The bar is 400 significant lines; this is 86 over it, 1.22× 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 (26 lines × 2) · ×3

Duplicated block (26 lines × 2) crates/macros/src/shared.rs:80 — crates/macros/src/shared.rs:80-105 | crates/oapi-macros/src/shared.rs:100-125 — before extracting anything, compare `crates/macros/src/shared.rs` and `crates/oapi-macros/src/shared.rs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 5 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 87 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 (26 lines × 2) crates/macros/src/shared.rs:117 — crates/macros/src/shared.rs:117-142 | crates/oapi-macros/src/shared.rs:133-158 — before extracting anything, compare `crates/macros/src/shared.rs` and `crates/oapi-macros/src/shared.rs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 5 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 87 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 (26 lines × 2) crates/oapi-macros/src/schema/enum_schemas.rs:513 — crates/oapi-macros/src/schema/enum_schemas.rs:513-538 | crates/oapi-macros/src/schema/enum_schemas.rs:561-586 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (18 lines × 2) · ×3

Duplicated block (18 lines × 2) crates/core/src/extract/case.rs:62 — crates/core/src/extract/case.rs:62-79 | crates/serde-util/src/case.rs:99-116 — before extracting anything, compare `crates/core/src/extract/case.rs` and `crates/serde-util/src/case.rs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 3 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 41 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 (18 lines × 2) crates/oapi-macros/src/component.rs:139 — crates/oapi-macros/src/component.rs:139-156 | crates/oapi-macros/src/component.rs:165-182 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
Duplicated block (18 lines × 2) crates/oapi-macros/src/response.rs:476 — crates/oapi-macros/src/response.rs:476-493 | crates/oapi-macros/src/response.rs:553-570 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (16 lines × 2) · ×3

Duplicated block (16 lines × 2) crates/extra/src/tower_compat.rs:115 — crates/extra/src/tower_compat.rs:115-130 | crates/extra/src/tower_compat.rs:279-294 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
Duplicated block (16 lines × 2) crates/macros/src/extract.rs:305 — crates/macros/src/extract.rs:305-320 | crates/oapi-macros/src/parameter/derive.rs:175-190 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice.
Duplicated block (16 lines × 2) crates/oapi-macros/src/schema/enum_schemas.rs:766 — crates/oapi-macros/src/schema/enum_schemas.rs:766-781 | crates/oapi-macros/src/schema/enum_schemas.rs:839-854 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.

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

Duplicated block (15 lines × 2) crates/macros/src/extract.rs:425 — crates/macros/src/extract.rs:425-439 | crates/macros/src/extract.rs:442-456 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
Duplicated block (15 lines × 2) crates/oapi-macros/src/schema/enum_schemas.rs:983 — crates/oapi-macros/src/schema/enum_schemas.rs:983-997 | crates/oapi-macros/src/schema/enum_schemas.rs:1037-1051 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
Duplicated block (15 lines × 2) crates/oapi-macros/src/schema_type.rs:69 — crates/oapi-macros/src/schema_type.rs:69-83 | crates/oapi-macros/src/schema_type.rs:358-372 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (10–11 lines × 2) · ×3

Duplicated block (10–11 lines × 2) crates/core/src/fs/named_file.rs:918 — crates/core/src/fs/named_file.rs:918-928 | crates/core/src/writing/seek.rs:113-122 — before extracting anything, compare `crates/core/src/fs/named_file.rs` and `crates/core/src/writing/seek.rs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 4 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 59 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 (10–11 lines × 2) crates/core/src/routing/filters/path.rs:620 — crates/core/src/routing/filters/path.rs:620-629 | crates/core/src/routing/filters/path.rs:638-648 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
Duplicated block (10–11 lines × 2) crates/oapi-macros/src/operation/example.rs:25 — crates/oapi-macros/src/operation/example.rs:25-34 | crates/oapi-macros/src/server.rs:124-134 — 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.

D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · StraightStream · ×2

StraightStream::poll_write (cyclomatic 16) crates/core/src/conn/stream/straight.rs:116 — StraightStream::poll_write has cyclomatic complexity 16 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top. This shape REPEATS in the file: one other method here (StraightStream::poll_write_vectored) has the same decision points, in the same order, at the same nesting depths — so this is one pattern written twice rather than two separate problems. Splitting this body alone leaves the other exactly as it is. Where these are variations on one operation, the change that clears both is the shared one: lift the common shape into a single routine the variants call, parameterised by whatever genuinely differs between them, and keep in each method only the part that is not shared.
StraightStream::poll_write_vectored (cyclomatic 16) crates/core/src/conn/stream/straight.rs:181 — StraightStream::poll_write_vectored has cyclomatic complexity 16 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top. This shape REPEATS in the file: one other method here (StraightStream::poll_write) has the same decision points, in the same order, at the same nesting depths — so this is one pattern written twice rather than two separate problems. Splitting this body alone leaves the other exactly as it is. Where these are variations on one operation, the change that clears both is the shared one: lift the common shape into a single routine the variants call, parameterised by whatever genuinely differs between them, and keep in each method only the part that is not shared.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · NamedStructSchema · ×2

NamedStructSchema::try_to_tokens (cognitive 62) crates/oapi-macros/src/schema/struct_schemas.rs:182 — NamedStructSchema::try_to_tokens has cognitive complexity 62 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 21 (36 pts), match/switch 6 (16 pts), boolean chains 5, loops 3 (5 pts) (nesting depth added 27). 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.
NamedStructSchema::field_as_schema_property (cognitive 17) crates/oapi-macros/src/schema/struct_schemas.rs:61 — NamedStructSchema::field_as_schema_property has cognitive complexity 17 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 8 (11 pts), boolean chains 3, match/switch 3 (nesting depth added 3). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · CombWisp · ×2

CombWisp::detect (cognitive 44) crates/core/src/routing/filters/path.rs:432 — CombWisp::detect has cognitive complexity 44 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 21 (40 pts), boolean chains 2, loops 1 (2 pts) (nesting depth added 20). 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.
CombWisp::new (cognitive 24) crates/core/src/routing/filters/path.rs:337 — CombWisp::new has cognitive complexity 24 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 9 (21 pts), match/switch 1 (2 pts), loops 1 (nesting depth added 13). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · Compression · ×2

Compression::handle (cognitive 35) crates/compression/src/lib.rs:463 — Compression::handle has cognitive complexity 35 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 20 (32 pts), boolean chains 2, match/switch 1 (nesting depth added 12). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
Compression::negotiate (cognitive 22) crates/compression/src/lib.rs:371 — Compression::negotiate has cognitive complexity 22 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 10 (16 pts), boolean chains 6 (nesting depth added 6). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · salvo_macros · ×2

salvo_macros::extract::generate (cognitive 24) crates/macros/src/extract.rs:274 — salvo_macros::extract::generate has cognitive complexity 24 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 13 (17 pts), loops 3 (5 pts), boolean chains 1, match/switch 1 (nesting depth added 6). Of this number, 23 points are the body's own statements and 1 belongs to one function item inside it that branches. To reduce it, split the body: most of this score is breadth rather than depth — checks laid out side by side rather than stacked — so group the statements between the checks into named steps and move each step into its own function. Some of it IS depth: where a check sits inside another whose only job is to reach it, merge the two into one condition, and where an else follows a branch that already returns, drop the trailing else and let the rest of the body continue at one level.
salvo_macros::shared::parse_input_type (cognitive 19) crates/macros/src/shared.rs:33 — salvo_macros::shared::parse_input_type has cognitive complexity 19 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 13 (19 pts) (nesting depth added 6). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · RequestBodyAttr · ×2

RequestBodyAttr::parse (cognitive 20) crates/oapi-macros/src/operation/request_body.rs:67 — RequestBodyAttr::parse has cognitive complexity 20 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 5 (11 pts), loops 2 (6 pts), match/switch 1 (3 pts) (nesting depth added 12). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
RequestBodyAttr::try_to_tokens (cognitive 20) crates/oapi-macros/src/operation/request_body.rs:158 — RequestBodyAttr::try_to_tokens has cognitive complexity 20 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 8 (14 pts), match/switch 2 (4 pts), loops 1 (2 pts) (nesting depth added 9). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · Router · ×2

Router::detect (cognitive 19) crates/core/src/routing/router.rs:117 — Router::detect has cognitive complexity 19 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 10 (18 pts), loops 1 (nesting depth added 8). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
Router::fmt::print (cognitive 17) crates/core/src/routing/router.rs:520 — Router::fmt::print has cognitive complexity 17 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 9 (10 pts), loops 2 (4 pts), match/switch 1 (3 pts) (nesting depth added 5). To reduce it, split the body: this score is breadth rather than depth — many checks laid out side by side rather than nested inside one another, so inverting conditions into early returns has nothing left to flatten. Group the statements between the checks into named steps and move each step into its own function, so the body reads as a short sequence of named stages.

D35 · Change Coupling · Change coupling clique · ×2

Change coupling clique: listener.rs, config.rs, listener.rs, listener.rs, listener.rs crates/core/src/conn/native_tls/listener.rs — 5 files — `crates/core/src/conn/native_tls/listener.rs`, `crates/core/src/conn/openssl/config.rs`, `crates/core/src/conn/openssl/listener.rs`, `crates/core/src/conn/quinn/listener.rs`, `crates/core/src/conn/rustls/listener.rs` — all change together with no explicit dependency: a fully-connected co-change clique, not 10 separate couplings. They share one concern (thin parallel siblings over a common abstraction), so extract the shared part into ONE unit and the whole clique's coupling clears at once — you do not need to break each pair individually.
Change coupling clique: cookie.rs, header.rs, path.rs, query.rs, json.rs crates/core/src/extract/parameter/cookie.rs — 5 files — `crates/core/src/extract/parameter/cookie.rs`, `crates/core/src/extract/parameter/header.rs`, `crates/core/src/extract/parameter/path.rs`, `crates/core/src/extract/parameter/query.rs`, `crates/core/src/extract/payload/json.rs` — all change together with no explicit dependency: a fully-connected co-change clique, not 10 separate couplings. They share one concern (thin parallel siblings over a common abstraction), so extract the shared part into ONE unit and the whole clique's coupling clears at once — you do not need to break each pair individually.

D35 · Change Coupling · Change coupling · ×2

Change coupling: named_file.rs ↔ seek.rs crates/core/src/fs/named_file.rs — `crates/core/src/fs/named_file.rs` and `crates/core/src/writing/seek.rs` change together 70% of the time (7 of the 10 commits that touched whichever of the two files changed less often, counting a file under its earlier names as well — a repo-wide or module-wide sweep is evidence about the sweep rather than about any pair inside it and is left out of BOTH sides of this ratio, while a dependency bump, a formatter/rename sweep, or a commit whose edit to one of the two files was a tool directive such as //go:generate or whitespace only is left out of the shared count ONLY, so the two sides are not taken over identical commit sets) with no explicit dependency — the edge is real but nothing declares it. Read the pair before acting: if one registers itself into the other through a hook or an initialiser, the missing dependency is DELIBERATE — the registration is the link, and it is meant not to be an import — and the thing to add is a comment on each side naming the other, not a merge; if they simply belong together, co-locate them; if neither holds, the coupling is hidden and worth breaking. You can check this without leaving the row: of the 7 shared commits counted here, the most recent 3 are `50a835bf` fix(core): correct conditional-request ordering, multi-range and IPv6…; `572e1a50` Fix ReadSeeker range response streaming whole reader and harden range…; `bcbffbba` fix: prevent panic on empty Range header in NamedFile and ReadSeeker … — run `git show` on any of them.
Change coupling: req.rs ↔ res.rs crates/core/src/http/body/req.rs — `crates/core/src/http/body/req.rs` and `crates/core/src/http/body/res.rs` change together 59% of the time (10 of the 17 commits that touched whichever of the two files changed less often, counting a file under its earlier names as well — a repo-wide or module-wide sweep is evidence about the sweep rather than about any pair inside it and is left out of BOTH sides of this ratio, while a dependency bump, a formatter/rename sweep, or a commit whose edit to one of the two files was a tool directive such as //go:generate or whitespace only is left out of the shared count ONLY, so the two sides are not taken over identical commit sets) with no explicit dependency between them. They sit in the same directory, but in this ecosystem each file is its own module — a sibling reference still needs an import — so the missing import edge is real: the coupling runs through shared behaviour, not a declared dependency. If they duplicate structure, extract the common part into one unit; otherwise the coupling is hidden and worth breaking. You can check this without leaving the row: of the 10 shared commits counted here, the most recent 3 are `dc4ea7ca` Document core HTTP types and validate ranges (#1682); `3cca8f64` Improve debug info for `ReqBody` and `ResBody` (#578); `5a954829` Add `BytesFrame` type to wrap `Frame<Bytes>` (#447) — run `git show` on any of them.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (24 lines × 2) · ×2

Duplicated block (24 lines × 2) crates/macros/src/handler.rs:16 — crates/macros/src/handler.rs:16-39 | crates/oapi-macros/src/endpoint.rs:142-165 — before extracting anything, compare `crates/macros/src/handler.rs` and `crates/oapi-macros/src/endpoint.rs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 5 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 67 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 (24 lines × 2) crates/oapi-macros/src/response.rs:500 — crates/oapi-macros/src/response.rs:500-523 | crates/oapi-macros/src/response.rs:598-621 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (23 lines × 2) · ×2

Duplicated block (23 lines × 2) crates/csrf/src/aes_gcm_cipher.rs:49 — crates/csrf/src/aes_gcm_cipher.rs:49-71 | crates/csrf/src/ccp_cipher.rs:49-71 — 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 (23 lines × 2) crates/oapi-macros/src/schema/enum_schemas.rs:812 — crates/oapi-macros/src/schema/enum_schemas.rs:812-834 | crates/oapi-macros/src/schema/enum_schemas.rs:998-1020 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (20 lines × 2) · ×2

Duplicated block (20 lines × 2) crates/core/src/conn/tcp.rs:245 — crates/core/src/conn/tcp.rs:245-264 | crates/core/src/conn/unix.rs:191-210 — 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 (20 lines × 2) crates/proxy/src/hyper_client.rs:149 — crates/proxy/src/hyper_client.rs:149-168 | crates/proxy/src/reqwest_client.rs:108-127 — the copies sit in sibling files of one directory, so a shared home is within easy reach: extract the block into a single shared function the call sites can all reach — a file they already depend on, or a new one alongside them — and call it from both call sites, so a change lands once.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (17 lines × 3) · ×2

Duplicated block (17 lines × 3) crates/core/src/conn/native_tls/listener.rs:165 — crates/core/src/conn/native_tls/listener.rs:165-181 | crates/core/src/conn/openssl/listener.rs:152-168 | crates/core/src/conn/rustls/listener.rs:154-170 — `crates/core/src/conn/native_tls/listener.rs` and `crates/core/src/conn/openssl/listener.rs` are one unit implemented once per sibling directory, so they are most likely parallel implementations of one contract rather than a copy of each other — this scan matched 4 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 46 lines. If both are selected at run time, neither can be retired in favour of the other, and the lines that DIFFER between them are the reason both exist. The move that pays here is to hoist the identical part into a shared location the whole family can reach and give what differs a parameter or a seam, so a change lands once instead of once per sibling; extracting one helper per block leaves every sibling to drift on its own.
Duplicated block (17 lines × 3) crates/oapi-macros/src/operation/encoding.rs:42 — crates/oapi-macros/src/operation/encoding.rs:42-58 | crates/oapi-macros/src/response.rs:520-536 | crates/oapi-macros/src/response.rs:618-634 — 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.

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

Duplicated block (17 lines × 2) crates/core/src/http/body/channel.rs:101 — crates/core/src/http/body/channel.rs:101-117 | crates/core/src/http/body/channel.rs:138-154 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
Duplicated block (17 lines × 2) crates/oapi-macros/src/schema/enum_variant.rs:238 — crates/oapi-macros/src/schema/enum_variant.rs:238-254 | crates/oapi-macros/src/schema/enum_variant.rs:344-360 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (14 lines × 3) · ×2

Duplicated block (14 lines × 3) crates/craft-macros/src/utils.rs:6 — crates/craft-macros/src/utils.rs:6-19 | crates/macros/src/shared.rs:18-31 | crates/oapi-macros/src/shared.rs:40-53 — before extracting anything, compare `crates/macros/src/shared.rs` and `crates/oapi-macros/src/shared.rs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 5 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 87 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 (14 lines × 3) crates/tus/src/handlers/delete.rs:34 — crates/tus/src/handlers/delete.rs:34-47 | crates/tus/src/handlers/get.rs:28-41 | crates/tus/src/handlers/head.rs:30-43 — before extracting anything, compare `crates/tus/src/handlers/delete.rs` and `crates/tus/src/handlers/get.rs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 3 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 36 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.

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

Duplicated block (13 lines × 2) crates/core/src/extract/case.rs:90 — crates/core/src/extract/case.rs:90-102 | crates/serde-util/src/case.rs:124-136 — before extracting anything, compare `crates/core/src/extract/case.rs` and `crates/serde-util/src/case.rs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 3 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 41 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 (13 lines × 2) crates/oapi-macros/src/response/derive.rs:269 — crates/oapi-macros/src/response/derive.rs:269-281 | crates/oapi-macros/src/response/derive.rs:316-328 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (9 lines × 3) · ×2

Duplicated block (9 lines × 3) crates/core/src/conn/stream/straight.rs:104 — crates/core/src/conn/stream/straight.rs:104-112 | crates/core/src/conn/stream/straight.rs:163-171 | crates/core/src/conn/stream/straight.rs:232-240 — all 3 copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from every one of those sites — resolving only two of them leaves the rest to drift apart the first time one is edited.
Duplicated block (9 lines × 3) crates/oapi-macros/src/response/derive.rs:306 — crates/oapi-macros/src/response/derive.rs:306-314 | crates/oapi-macros/src/response/derive.rs:406-414 | crates/oapi-macros/src/response/derive.rs:517-525 — all 3 copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from every one of those sites — resolving only two of them leaves the rest to drift apart the first time one is edited.

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

Duplicated block (8 lines × 3) crates/oapi-macros/src/component.rs:432 — crates/oapi-macros/src/component.rs:432-439 | crates/oapi-macros/src/component.rs:582-589 | crates/oapi-macros/src/component.rs:618-625 — all 3 copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from every one of those sites — resolving only two of them leaves the rest to drift apart the first time one is edited.
Duplicated block (8 lines × 3) crates/oapi/src/openapi/components.rs:182 — crates/oapi/src/openapi/components.rs:182-189 | crates/oapi/src/openapi/components.rs:211-218 | crates/oapi/src/openapi/content.rs:152-160 — 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.

D5 · Coupling · Off the main sequence · ×2

Off the main sequence: salvo-serde-util — salvo-serde-util: abstractness 0.00, instability 0.00, distance 1.00 — zone of pain — concrete and depended on by 2 project(s), so it's rigid to change.
Off the main sequence: salvo_core — salvo_core: abstractness 0.12, instability 0.06, distance 0.83 — zone of pain — concrete and depended on by 17 project(s), so it's rigid to change.

D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · StaticDir · ×1

StaticDir::handle (cyclomatic 56) crates/serve-static/src/dir.rs:486 — StaticDir::handle has cyclomatic complexity 56 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.

D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · RequestDeserializer · ×1

RequestDeserializer::fill_value (cyclomatic 52) crates/core/src/serde/request.rs:267 — RequestDeserializer::fill_value has cyclomatic complexity 52 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.

D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · salvo_oapi_macros · ×1

salvo_oapi_macros::bound::with_bound (cyclomatic 40) crates/oapi-macros/src/bound.rs:57 — salvo_oapi_macros::bound::with_bound has cyclomatic complexity 40 (threshold 15). To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Where every arm is uniform — the same kind of value, with no behaviour of its own — a table keyed by the case is the shorter form; wherever the arms carry different data or different behaviour, keep them as cases, because collapsing those trades an explicit, reviewable set of cases for nothing.

D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · ComponentSchema · ×1

ComponentSchema::non_generic_to_tokens (cyclomatic 35) crates/oapi-macros/src/component.rs:393 — ComponentSchema::non_generic_to_tokens has cyclomatic complexity 35 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.

D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · NamedFile · ×1

NamedFile::send_inner (cyclomatic 31) crates/core/src/fs/named_file.rs:812 — NamedFile::send_inner has cyclomatic complexity 31 (threshold 15). To reduce it, split the body: these branches sit side by side rather than nested inside one another, so extracting each one on its own would leave a function per branch. Group the statements between the checks into named steps and move each step into its own function, so the body reads as a short sequence of named stages.

D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · NamedStructSchema · ×1

NamedStructSchema::try_to_tokens (cyclomatic 31) crates/oapi-macros/src/schema/struct_schemas.rs:182 — NamedStructSchema::try_to_tokens has cyclomatic complexity 31 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.

D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · HyperHandler · ×1

HyperHandler::handle (cyclomatic 29) crates/core/src/service.rs:258 — HyperHandler::handle has cyclomatic complexity 29 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.

D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · HttpBuilder · ×1

HttpBuilder::serve_connection (cyclomatic 25) crates/core/src/conn/proto.rs:82 — HttpBuilder::serve_connection has cyclomatic complexity 25 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.

D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · Proxy · ×1

Proxy::build_proxied_request (cyclomatic 25) crates/proxy/src/lib.rs:506 — Proxy::build_proxied_request has cyclomatic complexity 25 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.

D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · Compression · ×1

Compression::handle (cyclomatic 23) crates/compression/src/lib.rs:463 — Compression::handle has cyclomatic complexity 23 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.

D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · PathParser · ×1

PathParser::scan_wisps (cyclomatic 22) crates/core/src/routing/filters/path.rs:828 — PathParser::scan_wisps has cyclomatic complexity 22 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.

D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · Builder · ×1

Builder::serve_connection (cyclomatic 21) crates/core/src/conn/quinn/builder.rs:102 — Builder::serve_connection has cyclomatic complexity 21 (threshold 15). To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Where every arm is uniform — the same kind of value, with no behaviour of its own — a table keyed by the case is the shorter form; wherever the arms carry different data or different behaviour, keep them as cases, because collapsing those trades an explicit, reviewable set of cases for nothing.

D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · UnnamedStructSchema · ×1

UnnamedStructSchema::try_to_tokens (cyclomatic 21) crates/oapi-macros/src/schema/struct_schemas.rs:531 — UnnamedStructSchema::try_to_tokens has cyclomatic complexity 21 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.

D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · Server · ×1

Server::try_serve (cyclomatic 19) crates/core/src/server.rs:323 — Server::try_serve has cyclomatic complexity 19 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.

D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · salvo_macros · ×1

salvo_macros::extract::generate (cyclomatic 19) crates/macros/src/extract.rs:274 — salvo_macros::extract::generate has cyclomatic complexity 19 (threshold 15). Of this number, 12 points are the body's own statements and 7 belong to one function item inside it that branches. To reduce it, split the body: these branches sit side by side rather than nested inside one another, so extracting each one on its own would leave a function per branch. Group the statements between the checks into named steps and move each step into its own function, so the body reads as a short sequence of named stages.

D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · OpenApi · ×1

OpenApi::merge_norm_node (cyclomatic 19) crates/oapi/src/openapi.rs:624 — OpenApi::merge_norm_node has cyclomatic complexity 19 (threshold 15). Of this number, 17 points are the body's own statements and 2 belong to one function item inside it that branches. 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 · EndpointAttr · ×1

EndpointAttr::parse (cyclomatic 19) crates/oapi-macros/src/endpoint/attr.rs:29 — EndpointAttr::parse has cyclomatic complexity 19 (threshold 15). To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Where every arm is uniform — the same kind of value, with no behaviour of its own — a table keyed by the case is the shorter form; wherever the arms carry different data or different behaviour, keep them as cases, because collapsing those trades an explicit, reviewable set of cases for nothing.

D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · CombWisp · ×1

CombWisp::detect (cyclomatic 18) crates/core/src/routing/filters/path.rs:432 — CombWisp::detect has cyclomatic complexity 18 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.

D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · NormNode · ×1

NormNode::new (cyclomatic 18) crates/oapi/src/routing.rs:101 — NormNode::new has cyclomatic complexity 18 (threshold 15). To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Where every arm is uniform — the same kind of value, with no behaviour of its own — a table keyed by the case is the shorter form; wherever the arms carry different data or different behaviour, keep them as cases, because collapsing those trades an explicit, reviewable set of cases for nothing.

D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · ToParameters · ×1

ToParameters::try_to_tokens (cyclomatic 18) crates/oapi-macros/src/parameter/derive.rs:64 — ToParameters::try_to_tokens has cyclomatic complexity 18 (threshold 15). Of this number, 11 points are the body's own statements and 7 belong to one function item inside it that branches. To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Where every arm is uniform — the same kind of value, with no behaviour of its own — a table keyed by the case is the shorter form; wherever the arms carry different data or different behaviour, keep them as cases, because collapsing those trades an explicit, reviewable set of cases for nothing.

D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · ResBody · ×1

ResBody::poll_frame (cyclomatic 17) crates/core/src/http/body/res.rs:150 — ResBody::poll_frame has cyclomatic complexity 17 (threshold 15). To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Where every arm is uniform — the same kind of value, with no behaviour of its own — a table keyed by the case is the shorter form; wherever the arms carry different data or different behaviour, keep them as cases, because collapsing those trades an explicit, reviewable set of cases for nothing.

D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · ReadSeeker · ×1

ReadSeeker::send (cyclomatic 17) crates/core/src/writing/seek.rs:65 — ReadSeeker::send has cyclomatic complexity 17 (threshold 15). To reduce it, split the body: these branches sit side by side rather than nested inside one another, so extracting each one on its own would leave a function per branch. Group the statements between the checks into named steps and move each step into its own function, so the body reads as a short sequence of named stages.

D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · Operation · ×1

Operation::modifiers (cyclomatic 16) crates/oapi-macros/src/operation.rs:115 — Operation::modifiers has cyclomatic complexity 16 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.

D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · SerdeContainer · ×1

SerdeContainer::parse_attribute (cyclomatic 16) crates/serde-util/src/lib.rs:155 — SerdeContainer::parse_attribute has cyclomatic complexity 16 (threshold 15). To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Where every arm is uniform — the same kind of value, with no behaviour of its own — a table keyed by the case is the shorter form; wherever the arms carry different data or different behaviour, keep them as cases, because collapsing those trades an explicit, reviewable set of cases for nothing.

D17 · Explicit Debt · FixmeComment · ×1

FixmeComment crates/oapi-macros/src/schema/enum_schemas.rs:930 — // FIXME perhaps design this better to lessen the amount of args. — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · StaticDir · ×1

StaticDir::handle (cognitive 164) crates/serve-static/src/dir.rs:486 — StaticDir::handle has cognitive complexity 164 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 45 (132 pts), loops 6 (23 pts), boolean chains 7, match/switch 1 (2 pts) (nesting depth added 105). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: this score is depth rather than breadth — most of its points come from checks stacked inside one another, so the work sits several levels in. Invert each enclosing check into an early exit (a return, or the language's equivalent) so the happy path stays at one level, and where a level cannot be exited early, lift the block it encloses into its own named function.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · ComponentSchema · ×1

ComponentSchema::non_generic_to_tokens (cognitive 84) crates/oapi-macros/src/component.rs:393 — ComponentSchema::non_generic_to_tokens has cognitive complexity 84 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 34 (71 pts), boolean chains 10, loops 1 (2 pts), match/switch 1 (nesting depth added 38). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: this score is depth rather than breadth — most of its points come from checks stacked inside one another, so the work sits several levels in. Invert each enclosing check into an early exit (a return, or the language's equivalent) so the happy path stays at one level, and where a level cannot be exited early, lift the block it encloses into its own named function.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · HttpBuilder · ×1

HttpBuilder::serve_connection (cognitive 61) crates/core/src/conn/proto.rs:82 — HttpBuilder::serve_connection has cognitive complexity 61 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 15 (40 pts), match/switch 9 (21 pts) (nesting depth added 37). The drivers above price the dispatch low by construction — a dispatch is charged once however many cases it lists, while each branch inside an arm is charged in full — so most of this count is what the case bodies hold, and the arms are where it can be reduced. To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Keep every case explicit, and make the behaviour for cases you do not list a deliberate choice rather than an accident.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · Builder · ×1

Builder::serve_connection (cognitive 53) crates/core/src/conn/quinn/builder.rs:102 — Builder::serve_connection has cognitive complexity 53 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: match/switch 10 (31 pts), if/else 9 (21 pts), loops 1 (nesting depth added 33). To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Keep every case explicit, and make the behaviour for cases you do not list a deliberate choice rather than an accident.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · NamedFile · ×1

NamedFile::send_inner (cognitive 47) crates/core/src/fs/named_file.rs:812 — NamedFile::send_inner has cognitive complexity 47 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 33 (39 pts), match/switch 3 (7 pts), boolean chains 1 (nesting depth added 10). To reduce it, split the body: most of this score is breadth rather than depth — checks laid out side by side rather than stacked — so group the statements between the checks into named steps and move each step into its own function. Some of it IS depth: where a check sits inside another whose only job is to reach it, merge the two into one condition, and where an else follows a branch that already returns, drop the trailing else and let the rest of the body continue at one level.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · Server · ×1

Server::try_serve (cognitive 41) crates/core/src/server.rs:323 — Server::try_serve has cognitive complexity 41 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 8 (18 pts), match/switch 6 (16 pts), loops 3 (4 pts), boolean chains 3 (nesting depth added 21). 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 · Proxy · ×1

Proxy::build_proxied_request (cognitive 40) crates/proxy/src/lib.rs:506 — Proxy::build_proxied_request has cognitive complexity 40 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 19 (28 pts), match/switch 3 (7 pts), boolean chains 4, loops 1 (nesting depth added 13). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · HyperHandler · ×1

HyperHandler::handle (cognitive 39) crates/core/src/service.rs:258 — HyperHandler::handle has cognitive complexity 39 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 21 (28 pts), boolean chains 9, loops 1 (2 pts) (nesting depth added 8). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · salvo_oapi · ×1

salvo_oapi::routing::normalize_oapi_path (cognitive 34) crates/oapi/src/routing.rs:12 — salvo_oapi::routing::normalize_oapi_path has cognitive complexity 34 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 11 (28 pts), loops 2 (3 pts), match/switch 1 (3 pts) (nesting depth added 20). 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 · EncodeStream · ×1

EncodeStream::poll_next (cognitive 33) crates/compression/src/stream.rs:82 — EncodeStream::poll_next has cognitive complexity 33 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 12 (30 pts), match/switch 1 (2 pts), loops 1 (nesting depth added 19). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · OpenApi · ×1

OpenApi::merge_norm_node (cognitive 33) crates/oapi/src/openapi.rs:624 — OpenApi::merge_norm_node has cognitive complexity 33 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 10 (17 pts), match/switch 4 (11 pts), boolean chains 4, loops 1 (nesting depth added 14). Of this number, 30 points are the body's own statements and 3 belong to one function item 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 · CharsWispBuilder · ×1

CharsWispBuilder::build (cognitive 31) crates/core/src/routing/filters/path.rs:204 — CharsWispBuilder::build has cognitive complexity 31 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 14 (31 pts) (nesting depth added 17). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: this score is depth rather than breadth — most of its points come from checks stacked inside one another, so the work sits several levels in. Invert each enclosing check into an early exit (a return, or the language's equivalent) so the happy path stays at one level, and where a level cannot be exited early, lift the block it encloses into its own named function.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · salvo_serve_static · ×1

salvo_serve_static::embed::render_embedded_data (cognitive 27) crates/serve-static/src/embed.rs:102 — salvo_serve_static::embed::render_embedded_data has cognitive complexity 27 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 14 (18 pts), match/switch 3 (9 pts) (nesting depth added 10). To reduce it, split the body: most of this score is breadth rather than depth — checks laid out side by side rather than stacked — so group the statements between the checks into named steps and move each step into its own function. Some of it IS depth: where a check sits inside another whose only job is to reach it, merge the two into one condition, and where an else follows a branch that already returns, drop the trailing else and let the rest of the body continue at one level.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · FormData · ×1

FormData::read (cognitive 26) crates/core/src/http/form.rs:45 — FormData::read has cognitive complexity 26 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 7 (18 pts), loops 3 (7 pts), match/switch 1 (nesting depth added 15). The drivers above price the dispatch low by construction — a dispatch is charged once however many cases it lists, while each branch inside an arm is charged in full — so most of this count is what the case bodies hold, and the arms are where it can be reduced. To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Keep every case explicit, and make the behaviour for cases you do not list a deliberate choice rather than an accident.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · HttpRange · ×1

HttpRange::parse (cognitive 26) crates/core/src/http/range.rs:46 — HttpRange::parse has cognitive complexity 26 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 15 (25 pts), boolean chains 1 (nesting depth added 10). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · Operation · ×1

Operation::modifiers (cognitive 26) crates/oapi-macros/src/operation.rs:115 — Operation::modifiers has cognitive complexity 26 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 10 (17 pts), match/switch 2 (6 pts), boolean chains 2, loops 1 (nesting depth added 11). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · ResponseTuple · ×1

ResponseTuple::try_to_tokens (cognitive 25) crates/oapi-macros/src/response.rs:297 — ResponseTuple::try_to_tokens has cognitive complexity 25 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 7 (14 pts), match/switch 5 (11 pts) (nesting depth added 13). The drivers above price the dispatch low by construction — a dispatch is charged once however many cases it lists, while each branch inside an arm is charged in full — so most of this count is what the case bodies hold, and the arms are where it can be reduced. To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Keep every case explicit, and make the behaviour for cases you do not list a deliberate choice rather than an accident.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · FlexNamer · ×1

FlexNamer::assign_name (cognitive 23) crates/oapi/src/naming.rs:294 — FlexNamer::assign_name has cognitive complexity 23 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 10 (18 pts), loops 2 (4 pts), match/switch 1 (nesting depth added 10). The drivers above price the dispatch low by construction — a dispatch is charged once however many cases it lists, while each branch inside an arm is charged in full — so most of this count is what the case bodies hold, and the arms are where it can be reduced. To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Keep every case explicit, and make the behaviour for cases you do not list a deliberate choice rather than an accident.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · ReadSeeker · ×1

ReadSeeker::send (cognitive 22) crates/core/src/writing/seek.rs:65 — ReadSeeker::send has cognitive complexity 22 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 16 (18 pts), match/switch 2 (4 pts) (nesting depth added 4). To reduce it, split the body: most of this score is breadth rather than depth — checks laid out side by side rather than stacked — so group the statements between the checks into named steps and move each step into its own function. Some of it IS depth: where a check sits inside another whose only job is to reach it, merge the two into one condition, and where an else follows a branch that already returns, drop the trailing else and let the rest of the body continue at one level.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · ReqwestClient · ×1

ReqwestClient::execute (cognitive 20) crates/proxy/src/reqwest_client.rs:58 — ReqwestClient::execute has cognitive complexity 20 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 9 (16 pts), match/switch 1 (4 pts) (nesting depth added 10). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · NamedFileBuilder · ×1

NamedFileBuilder::build (cognitive 19) crates/core/src/fs/named_file.rs:325 — NamedFileBuilder::build has cognitive complexity 19 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 11 (13 pts), boolean chains 5, match/switch 1 (nesting depth added 2). To reduce it, split the body: most of this score is breadth rather than depth — checks laid out side by side rather than stacked — so group the statements between the checks into named steps and move each step into its own function. Some of it IS depth: where a check sits inside another whose only job is to reach it, merge the two into one condition, and where an else follows a branch that already returns, drop the trailing else and let the rest of the body continue at one level.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · UnnamedStructSchema · ×1

UnnamedStructSchema::try_to_tokens (cognitive 19) crates/oapi-macros/src/schema/struct_schemas.rs:531 — UnnamedStructSchema::try_to_tokens has cognitive complexity 19 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 8 (14 pts), boolean chains 3, match/switch 1 (2 pts) (nesting depth added 7). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · TusOptions · ×1

TusOptions::extract_host_and_proto (cognitive 19) crates/tus/src/options.rs:344 — TusOptions::extract_host_and_proto has cognitive complexity 19 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 8 (15 pts), boolean chains 4 (nesting depth added 7). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · QuinnAcceptor · ×1

QuinnAcceptor::accept (cognitive 18) crates/core/src/conn/quinn/listener.rs:177 — QuinnAcceptor::accept has cognitive complexity 18 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: match/switch 7 (17 pts), loops 1 (nesting depth added 10). To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Keep every case explicit, and make the behaviour for cases you do not list a deliberate choice rather than an accident.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · RegexWisp · ×1

RegexWisp::detect (cognitive 18) crates/core/src/routing/filters/path.rs:606 — RegexWisp::detect has cognitive complexity 18 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 10 (16 pts), boolean chains 2 (nesting depth added 6). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · Csrf · ×1

Csrf::handle (cognitive 18) crates/csrf/src/lib.rs:339 — Csrf::handle has cognitive complexity 18 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 9 (17 pts), match/switch 1 (nesting depth added 8). The drivers above price the dispatch low by construction — a dispatch is charged once however many cases it lists, while each branch inside an arm is charged in full — so most of this count is what the case bodies hold, and the arms are where it can be reduced. To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Keep every case explicit, and make the behaviour for cases you do not list a deliberate choice rather than an accident.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · WebSocketUpgrade · ×1

WebSocketUpgrade::upgrade (cognitive 18) crates/extra/src/websocket.rs:377 — WebSocketUpgrade::upgrade has cognitive complexity 18 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 12 (14 pts), match/switch 2 (4 pts) (nesting depth added 4). This file's own header attributes it to another copyright holder, so it is code this repository carries rather than code it wrote: restructuring the body in place forks it from upstream and turns every future re-sync into a manual merge. The performable moves are to leave the body as close to its upstream form as possible and keep it behind a narrow interface of your own, and to re-sync it when upstream changes — or, if it has already diverged far enough that you maintain it here, adopt it deliberately and then split the body into named stages.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · FieldInfo · ×1

FieldInfo::try_from (cognitive 18) crates/macros/src/extract.rs:27 — FieldInfo::try_from has cognitive complexity 18 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 9 (16 pts), boolean chains 1, loops 1 (nesting depth added 7). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · ComplexEnum · ×1

ComplexEnum::tagged_variant_tokens (cognitive 18) crates/oapi-macros/src/schema/enum_schemas.rs:727 — ComplexEnum::tagged_variant_tokens has cognitive complexity 18 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 9 (17 pts), match/switch 1 (nesting depth added 8). The drivers above price the dispatch low by construction — a dispatch is charged once however many cases it lists, while each branch inside an arm is charged in full — so most of this count is what the case bodies hold, and the arms are where it can be reduced. To reduce it, keep the dispatch but shrink the arms: move each non-trivial case body into its own named function (or onto the value being matched) so the dispatch reads one line per case, and group related cases into a sub-dispatch. Keep every case explicit, and make the behaviour for cases you do not list a deliberate choice rather than an accident.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · Tracing · ×1

Tracing::handle (cognitive 18) crates/otel/src/tracing.rs:88 — Tracing::handle has cognitive complexity 18 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 13 (15 pts), boolean chains 1, loops 1, match/switch 1 (nesting depth added 2). To reduce it, split the body: most of this score is breadth rather than depth — checks laid out side by side rather than stacked — so group the statements between the checks into named steps and move each step into its own function. Some of it IS depth: where a check sits inside another whose only job is to reach it, merge the two into one condition, and where an else follows a branch that already returns, drop the trailing else and let the rest of the body continue at one level.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · Parameter · ×1

Parameter::try_to_tokens (cognitive 17) crates/oapi-macros/src/parameter/derive.rs:520 — Parameter::try_to_tokens has cognitive complexity 17 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 12 (14 pts), match/switch 1 (2 pts), boolean chains 1 (nesting depth added 3). To reduce it, split the body: most of this score is breadth rather than depth — checks laid out side by side rather than stacked — so group the statements between the checks into named steps and move each step into its own function. Some of it IS depth: where a check sits inside another whose only job is to reach it, merge the two into one condition, and where an else follows a branch that already returns, drop the trailing else and let the rest of the body continue at one level.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · ToSchema · ×1

ToSchema::try_to_tokens (cognitive 17) crates/oapi-macros/src/schema.rs:75 — ToSchema::try_to_tokens has cognitive complexity 17 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 11 (12 pts), match/switch 3 (5 pts) (nesting depth added 3). To reduce it, split the body: this score is breadth rather than depth — many checks laid out side by side rather than nested inside one another, so inverting conditions into early returns has nothing left to flatten. Group the statements between the checks into named steps and move each step into its own function, so the body reads as a short sequence of named stages.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · HyperClient · ×1

HyperClient::execute (cognitive 17) crates/proxy/src/hyper_client.rs:123 — HyperClient::execute has cognitive complexity 17 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 6 (13 pts), match/switch 1 (4 pts) (nesting depth added 10). To reduce it, flatten the nesting: this score is depth rather than breadth — most of its points come from checks stacked inside one another, so the work sits several levels in. Invert each enclosing check into an early exit (a return, or the language's equivalent) so the happy path stays at one level, and where a level cannot be exited early, lift the block it encloses into its own named function.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · AcmeListenerBuilder · ×1

AcmeListenerBuilder::build_certon_manager (cognitive 16) crates/acme/src/listener.rs:288 — AcmeListenerBuilder::build_certon_manager has cognitive complexity 16 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 10 (13 pts), match/switch 2 (3 pts) (nesting depth added 4). To reduce it, split the body: most of this score is breadth rather than depth — checks laid out side by side rather than stacked — so group the statements between the checks into named steps and move each step into its own function. Some of it IS depth: where a check sits inside another whose only job is to reach it, merge the two into one condition, and where an else follows a branch that already returns, drop the trailing else and let the rest of the body continue at one level.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · FlatParser · ×1

FlatParser::next (cognitive 16) crates/core/src/serde/flat_value.rs:224 — FlatParser::next has cognitive complexity 16 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 5 (12 pts), match/switch 1 (2 pts), boolean chains 1, loops 1 (nesting depth added 8). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · EndpointAttr · ×1

EndpointAttr::parse (cognitive 16) crates/oapi-macros/src/endpoint/attr.rs:29 — EndpointAttr::parse has cognitive complexity 16 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 5 (13 pts), match/switch 1 (2 pts), loops 1 (nesting depth added 9). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · EnumResponse · ×1

EnumResponse::parse_variant_attributes (cognitive 16) crates/oapi-macros/src/response/derive.rs:583 — EnumResponse::parse_variant_attributes has cognitive complexity 16 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 5 (9 pts), loops 2 (4 pts), boolean chains 3 (nesting depth added 6). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity · StaticEmbed · ×1

StaticEmbed::handle (cognitive 16) crates/serve-static/src/embed.rs:282 — StaticEmbed::handle has cognitive complexity 16 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 7 (11 pts), boolean chains 2, loops 1 (2 pts), match/switch 1 (nesting depth added 5). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.

D22 · Internal API Consistency · Duplicate method names with identical signatures. `directory` and `get_directory` appear to perform the same configuration action (setting a directory URL), likely due to a copy-paste error or incomplete refactoring. · ×1

Duplicate method names with identical signatures. `directory` and `get_directory` appear to perform the same configuration action (setting a directory URL), likely due to a copy-paste error or incomplete refactoring. — Remove `get_directory` and keep `directory`, or rename `directory` to `set_directory` if `get` implies retrieval (though the signature suggests configuration). (signatures: AcmeListenerBuilder.directory(name: impl Into<String>, url: impl Into<String>): Self | AcmeListenerBuilder.get_directory(name: impl Into<String>, url: impl Into<String>): Self)

D22 · Internal API Consistency · Ambiguous duplication. `insert_typed` and `inject` both take a value `V` and return `Self`. In many contexts, 'inject' is a synonym for 'insert'. Without seeing the implementation, it is unclear if they differ by key derivation or behavior, but the naming convention is inconsistent (one is explicit about type, one is generic verb). · ×1

Ambiguous duplication. `insert_typed` and `inject` both take a value `V` and return `Self`. In many contexts, 'inject' is a synonym for 'insert'. Without seeing the implementation, it is unclear if they differ by key derivation or behavior, but the naming convention is inconsistent (one is explicit about type, one is generic verb). — Clarify if `inject` is an alias for `insert_typed`. If so, deprecate one. If they differ (e.g., `inject` auto-derives key from type), rename `insert_typed` to `insert` for clarity. (signatures: Depot.insert_typed(value: V): Self | Depot.inject(value: V): Self)

D22 · Internal API Consistency · Duplicate method names with identical signatures. `get_typed`/`obtain` and `get_typed_mut`/`obtain_mut` appear to be synonyms for retrieving typed values from the depot. · ×1

Duplicate method names with identical signatures. `get_typed`/`obtain` and `get_typed_mut`/`obtain_mut` appear to be synonyms for retrieving typed values from the depot. — Remove `obtain` and `obtain_mut`, keeping `get_typed` and `get_typed_mut` for consistency with standard `HashMap`-like naming conventions (`get`/`get_mut`). (signatures: Depot.get_typed_mut(): Result | Depot.obtain_mut(): Result)

D22 · Internal API Consistency · Inconsistent naming for removal operations. `delete` returns a `bool` (success/failure), while `remove` returns a `Box` (likely the removed value or a result). This is confusing because `remove` typically implies returning the value in Rust, while `delete` implies a void/bool action. However, the return types are vastly different, suggesting they might do different things, but the names are counter-intuitive relative to their signatures. · ×1

Inconsistent naming for removal operations. `delete` returns a `bool` (success/failure), while `remove` returns a `Box` (likely the removed value or a result). This is confusing because `remove` typically implies returning the value in Rust, while `delete` implies a void/bool action. However, the return types are vastly different, suggesting they might do different things, but the names are counter-intuitive relative to their signatures. — Rename `delete` to `remove` (if it returns bool, maybe `try_remove`?) and `remove` to `take` or `extract`. Standard Rust convention is `remove` returns `Option<T>`. Here, `remove` returns `Box`, which is unusual. Suggest renaming `remove` to `take` and `delete` to `remove` or `try_remove`. (signatures: Depot.delete(key: str): bool | Depot.remove(key: str): Box)

D22 · Internal API Consistency · Duplicate method signatures. Two methods named `extension` with identical parameters but different return types (`Problem` vs `Self`). This is a compile error in Rust unless they are in different traits or one is a typo in the API surface description. Assuming it's a valid surface, this is a severe inconsistency/error. · ×1

Duplicate method signatures. Two methods named `extension` with identical parameters but different return types (`Problem` vs `Self`). This is a compile error in Rust unless they are in different traits or one is a typo in the API surface description. Assuming it's a valid surface, this is a severe inconsistency/error. — This looks like a documentation error or a genuine API flaw. If one is a builder method and one is a getter, the signatures should differ (e.g., getter takes no args). If both are setters, they are duplicates. (signatures: Problem.extension(name: impl Into<String>, value: Value): Problem | Problem.extension(name: impl Into<String>, value: Value): Self)

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

REDACTED

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

REDACTED

D4 · Code Duplication · Near-duplicate member pair (100 shared lines) · ×1

Near-duplicate member pair (100 shared lines) crates/oapi-macros/src/schema/enum_schemas.rs:735 — crates/oapi-macros/src/schema/enum_schemas.rs:735-928 | crates/oapi-macros/src/schema/enum_schemas.rs:941-1099 — These two members are variants of one another: 100 of their lines are already reported as duplicated blocks below, spread through both bodies rather than gathered into one. Read them as a single construct written twice. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared pipeline into one implementation the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (sync against async, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Extracting the individual blocks below is not the same fix: it leaves the two bodies in place and the next edit still has to be made twice.

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

Members sharing a duplicated core (4 members, 50+ identical tokens) crates/tus/src/handlers/delete.rs:13 — crates/tus/src/handlers/delete.rs:13-73 | crates/tus/src/handlers/get.rs:13-97 | crates/tus/src/handlers/head.rs:15-129 | crates/tus/src/handlers/post.rs:21-343 — 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 (41 lines × 2) · ×1

Duplicated block (41 lines × 2) crates/core/src/conn/stream/straight.rs:128 — crates/core/src/conn/stream/straight.rs:128-168 | crates/core/src/conn/stream/straight.rs:197-237 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (39–40 lines × 2) · ×1

Duplicated block (39–40 lines × 2) crates/oapi-macros/src/schema/enum_schemas.rs:890 — crates/oapi-macros/src/schema/enum_schemas.rs:890-928 | crates/oapi-macros/src/schema/enum_schemas.rs:1060-1099 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (38 lines × 2) · ×1

Duplicated block (38 lines × 2) crates/oapi-macros/src/schema/enum_schemas.rs:736 — crates/oapi-macros/src/schema/enum_schemas.rs:736-773 | crates/oapi-macros/src/schema/enum_schemas.rs:942-979 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (34–37 lines × 2) · ×1

Duplicated block (34–37 lines × 2) crates/core/src/conn/quinn/builder.rs:307 — crates/core/src/conn/quinn/builder.rs:307-343 | crates/core/src/conn/quinn/builder.rs:367-400 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (30–31 lines × 2) · ×1

Duplicated block (30–31 lines × 2) crates/tus/src/handlers/get.rs:23 — crates/tus/src/handlers/get.rs:23-53 | crates/tus/src/handlers/head.rs:25-54 — before extracting anything, compare `crates/tus/src/handlers/get.rs` and `crates/tus/src/handlers/head.rs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 5 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 78 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (21–27 lines × 2) · ×1

Duplicated block (21–27 lines × 2) crates/oapi-macros/src/operation/request_body.rs:165 — crates/oapi-macros/src/operation/request_body.rs:165-185 | crates/oapi-macros/src/response.rs:325-351 — before extracting anything, compare `crates/oapi-macros/src/operation/request_body.rs` and `crates/oapi-macros/src/response.rs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 3 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 57 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 (20 lines × 3) · ×1

Duplicated block (20 lines × 3) crates/oapi-macros/src/schema/enum_schemas.rs:508 — crates/oapi-macros/src/schema/enum_schemas.rs:508-527 | crates/oapi-macros/src/schema/enum_schemas.rs:737-756 | crates/oapi-macros/src/schema/enum_schemas.rs:943-962 — all 3 copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from every one of those sites — resolving only two of them leaves the rest to drift apart the first time one is edited.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (19–20 lines × 2) · ×1

Duplicated block (19–20 lines × 2) crates/core/src/fs/named_file.rs:930 — crates/core/src/fs/named_file.rs:930-949 | crates/core/src/writing/seek.rs:124-142 — before extracting anything, compare `crates/core/src/fs/named_file.rs` and `crates/core/src/writing/seek.rs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 4 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 59 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 (11–19 lines × 3) · ×1

Duplicated block (11–19 lines × 3) crates/oapi-macros/src/operation/request_body.rs:167 — crates/oapi-macros/src/operation/request_body.rs:167-179 | crates/oapi-macros/src/response.rs:328-346 | crates/oapi-macros/src/response.rs:918-928 — before extracting anything, compare `crates/oapi-macros/src/operation/request_body.rs` and `crates/oapi-macros/src/response.rs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 3 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 57 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 (18–19 lines × 2) · ×1

Duplicated block (18–19 lines × 2) crates/oapi-macros/src/schema/enum_schemas.rs:135 — crates/oapi-macros/src/schema/enum_schemas.rs:135-153 | crates/oapi-macros/src/schema/enum_schemas.rs:171-188 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.

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

Duplicated block (18 lines × 3) crates/oapi-macros/src/schema/enum_schemas.rs:558 — crates/oapi-macros/src/schema/enum_schemas.rs:558-575 | crates/oapi-macros/src/schema/enum_schemas.rs:814-831 | crates/oapi-macros/src/schema/enum_schemas.rs:1000-1017 — all 3 copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from every one of those sites — resolving only two of them leaves the rest to drift apart the first time one is edited.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (15 lines × 6) · ×1

Duplicated block (15 lines × 6) crates/oapi-macros/src/schema/enum_schemas.rs:513 — crates/oapi-macros/src/schema/enum_schemas.rs:513-527 | crates/oapi-macros/src/schema/enum_schemas.rs:561-575 | crates/oapi-macros/src/schema/enum_schemas.rs:742-756 | crates/oapi-macros/src/schema/enum_schemas.rs:817-831 | crates/oapi-macros/src/schema/enum_schemas.rs:948-962 | crates/oapi-macros/src/schema/enum_schemas.rs:1003-1017 — all 6 copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from every one of those sites — resolving only two of them leaves the rest to drift apart the first time one is edited.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (15 lines × 3) · ×1

Duplicated block (15 lines × 3) crates/tus/src/handlers/delete.rs:15 — crates/tus/src/handlers/delete.rs:15-29 | crates/tus/src/handlers/get.rs:15-29 | crates/tus/src/handlers/head.rs:17-31 — before extracting anything, compare `crates/tus/src/handlers/delete.rs` and `crates/tus/src/handlers/get.rs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 3 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 36 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (13–15 lines × 2) · ×1

Duplicated block (13–15 lines × 2) crates/oapi-macros/src/component.rs:452 — crates/oapi-macros/src/component.rs:452-464 | crates/oapi-macros/src/component.rs:602-616 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (12–13 lines × 3) · ×1

Duplicated block (12–13 lines × 3) crates/core/src/conn/stream/straight.rs:83 — crates/core/src/conn/stream/straight.rs:83-95 | crates/core/src/conn/stream/straight.rs:121-132 | crates/core/src/conn/stream/straight.rs:190-201 — all 3 copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from every one of those sites — resolving only two of them leaves the rest to drift apart the first time one is edited.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (10–11 lines × 3) · ×1

Duplicated block (10–11 lines × 3) crates/tus/src/handlers/get.rs:67 — crates/tus/src/handlers/get.rs:67-76 | crates/tus/src/handlers/head.rs:78-87 | crates/tus/src/handlers/patch.rs:96-106 — before extracting anything, compare `crates/tus/src/handlers/get.rs` and `crates/tus/src/handlers/head.rs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 5 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 78 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (9–11 lines × 2) · ×1

Duplicated block (9–11 lines × 2) crates/oapi-macros/src/operation/request_body.rs:193 — crates/oapi-macros/src/operation/request_body.rs:193-203 | crates/oapi-macros/src/response.rs:359-367 — before extracting anything, compare `crates/oapi-macros/src/operation/request_body.rs` and `crates/oapi-macros/src/response.rs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 3 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 57 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 (9–10 lines × 3) · ×1

Duplicated block (9–10 lines × 3) crates/core/src/conn/native_tls/listener.rs:74 — crates/core/src/conn/native_tls/listener.rs:74-83 | crates/core/src/conn/openssl/listener.rs:73-81 | crates/core/src/conn/rustls/listener.rs:72-81 — `crates/core/src/conn/native_tls/listener.rs` and `crates/core/src/conn/openssl/listener.rs` are one unit implemented once per sibling directory, so they are most likely parallel implementations of one contract rather than a copy of each other — this scan matched 4 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 46 lines. If both are selected at run time, neither can be retired in favour of the other, and the lines that DIFFER between them are the reason both exist. The move that pays here is to hoist the identical part into a shared location the whole family can reach and give what differs a parameter or a seam, so a change lands once instead of once per sibling; extracting one helper per block leaves every sibling to drift on its own.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (8–10 lines × 3) · ×1

Duplicated block (8–10 lines × 3) crates/oapi-macros/src/response/derive.rs:411 — crates/oapi-macros/src/response/derive.rs:411-420 | crates/oapi-macros/src/response/derive.rs:467-476 | crates/oapi-macros/src/response/derive.rs:674-681 — all 3 copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from every one of those sites — resolving only two of them leaves the rest to drift apart the first time one is edited.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (9–10 lines × 2) · ×1

Duplicated block (9–10 lines × 2) crates/core/src/catcher.rs:433 — crates/core/src/catcher.rs:433-441 | crates/core/src/catcher.rs:483-492 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (7–8 lines × 3) · ×1

Duplicated block (7–8 lines × 3) crates/oapi-macros/src/component.rs:455 — crates/oapi-macros/src/component.rs:455-461 | crates/oapi-macros/src/component.rs:607-613 | crates/oapi-macros/src/component.rs:644-651 — all 3 copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from every one of those sites — resolving only two of them leaves the rest to drift apart the first time one is edited.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (7–8 lines × 2) · ×1

Duplicated block (7–8 lines × 2) crates/oapi-macros/src/component.rs:232 — crates/oapi-macros/src/component.rs:232-239 | crates/oapi-macros/src/component.rs:313-319 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (6–7 lines × 4) · ×1

Duplicated block (6–7 lines × 4) crates/tus/src/handlers/delete.rs:19 — crates/tus/src/handlers/delete.rs:19-24 | crates/tus/src/handlers/get.rs:19-24 | crates/tus/src/handlers/head.rs:21-26 | crates/tus/src/handlers/post.rs:25-31 — before extracting anything, compare `crates/tus/src/handlers/delete.rs` and `crates/tus/src/handlers/get.rs` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 3 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 36 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place.

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

Duplicated block (6 lines × 4) crates/oapi-macros/src/component.rs:455 — crates/oapi-macros/src/component.rs:455-460 | crates/oapi-macros/src/component.rs:607-612 | crates/oapi-macros/src/component.rs:644-649 | crates/oapi-macros/src/component.rs:655-660 — all 4 copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from every one of those sites — resolving only two of them leaves the rest to drift apart the first time one is edited.

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

Duplicated block (4–6 lines × 3) crates/compression/src/lib.rs:520 — crates/compression/src/lib.rs:520-523 | crates/compression/src/lib.rs:531-536 | crates/compression/src/lib.rs:545-550 — all 3 copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from every one of those sites — resolving only two of them leaves the rest to drift apart the first time one is edited.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (2–5 lines × 4) · ×1

Duplicated block (2–5 lines × 4) crates/core/src/http/body/req.rs:208 — crates/core/src/http/body/req.rs:208-212 | crates/core/src/http/body/res.rs:168-169 | crates/core/src/http/body/res.rs:174-175 | crates/core/src/http/body/res.rs:234-238 — there are 4 copies across 2 file(s) — more copies than files, so at least one file holds the block twice. Extract it once into a single shared function every call site can reach and call it from all 4 sites; resolving a subset leaves the remainder to drift apart.

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

Duplicated block (6 lines × 3) crates/core/src/extract/payload/file.rs:57 — crates/core/src/extract/payload/file.rs:57-62 | crates/core/src/http/form.rs:155-160 | crates/core/src/http/request.rs:849-854 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere all 3 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 3 times.

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

Duplicated block (12 lines × 3) crates/core/src/conn/native_tls/listener.rs:218 — crates/core/src/conn/native_tls/listener.rs:218-229 | crates/core/src/conn/openssl/listener.rs:204-215 | crates/core/src/conn/rustls/listener.rs:205-216 — `crates/core/src/conn/native_tls/listener.rs` and `crates/core/src/conn/openssl/listener.rs` are one unit implemented once per sibling directory, so they are most likely parallel implementations of one contract rather than a copy of each other — this scan matched 4 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 46 lines. If both are selected at run time, neither can be retired in favour of the other, and the lines that DIFFER between them are the reason both exist. The move that pays here is to hoist the identical part into a shared location the whole family can reach and give what differs a parameter or a seam, so a change lands once instead of once per sibling; extracting one helper per block leaves every sibling to drift on its own.

D4 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (8 lines × 4) · ×1

Duplicated block (8 lines × 4) crates/core/src/conn/proto.rs:184 — crates/core/src/conn/proto.rs:184-191 | crates/core/src/conn/proto.rs:202-209 | crates/core/src/conn/proto.rs:244-251 | crates/core/src/conn/proto.rs:259-266 — all 4 copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from every one of those sites — resolving only two of them leaves the rest to drift apart the first time one is edited.

P12 · CI test-gate honesty · Coverage collected but not gated · ×1

Coverage collected but not gated — CI collects a coverage report but no step enforces a minimum — coverage could halve and CI stays green. Add a step that fails the build when coverage drops below a floor (your coverage tool's minimum-threshold flag, or a coverage-gate action) so the number guards something. What was searched, so you can tell an absence from a miss: this repository's CI files AND its coverage configuration — the well-known coverage and test-runner config files, read at the repository root and inside workspace package directories two levels down, so a floor declared beside the tests rather than in the pipeline is credited — matched against the threshold settings this check knows by name. A floor set in your coverage service's web UI rather than in a committed file, or under a setting whose name is not one of those, is not seen here.

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

JavaScript dependencies are not locked — No package-lock.json / yarn.lock / pnpm-lock.yaml / bun.lock — JS installs aren't reproducible (SSDF PW.4.4). Commit your package manager's lockfile and install from it (`npm ci`, `yarn --immutable`, `pnpm i --frozen-lockfile` or `bun i --frozen-lockfile`). Advisory — never scored.

Minor — 13 finding(s)

X6 · Hand-rolled structured-format parsing · Hand-rolled JSON/XML parsing via regex · ×2

Hand-rolled JSON/XML parsing via regex crates/oapi/src/swagger_ui/v5.32.11/swagger-ui-es-bundle.js:2 — A regex whose pattern encodes JSON/XML syntax is parsing a structured format by hand — malformed or differently-typed content (e.g. `"amount": "5"` as a string) silently mis-parses instead of failing validation. This JavaScript/TypeScript code already uses a real parser in the same package; use it here too.
Hand-rolled JSON/XML parsing via regex crates/oapi/src/swagger_ui/v5.32.11/swagger-ui-bundle.js:2 — A regex whose pattern encodes JSON/XML syntax is parsing a structured format by hand — malformed or differently-typed content (e.g. `"amount": "5"` as a string) silently mis-parses instead of failing validation. This JavaScript/TypeScript code already uses a real parser in the same package; use it here too.

D19 · Documentation Quality · Documentation · ×1

Documentation: no project overview README.md — The root README begins with a logo, links, and build status but does not state what the repository is for or what it does (e.g. 'Salvo is a Rust web framework' versus the detailed features list that follows). State the project's purpose in one sentence above the table of contents so readers can find it without scanning.

D26 · Project Cohesion · Split crates/core · ×1

Split crates/core — A huge catch-all at 26k LoC across 18 namespaces is a sprawling grab-bag. Suggested:

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

REDACTED

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

REDACTED

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

REDACTED

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

REDACTED

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

REDACTED

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

REDACTED

M2 · Architecture documentation · No ADRs · ×1

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

P4 · Deployment & Rollback · No release approval gate · ×1

No release approval gate — The release is automated and no gate that pauses it for a human is DECLARED IN THIS REPOSITORY'S PIPELINE FILES. What was read: every file under `.github/workflows/`, `.forgejo/workflows/`, `.gitea/workflows/`, `.azuredevops/` and `.azure-pipelines/`, plus `.gitlab-ci*` and `azure-pipelines*` — with comment text stripped, so documenting a gate is not declaring one. What would have counted: GitLab's `when: manual`, CircleCI's `type: approval`, an Azure `ManualValidation@` task or an `approvals:` block, a Jenkins `input` step, a `uses:` step naming an approval action, an `environment:` paired with `reviewers` / `required_reviewers` / `protection` / `wait-timer` / `deployment_branch_policy`, a draft-release step, a `workflow_dispatch` promotion, or a release-event gate. ★ What this cannot see, because none of it is a file: a GitHub environment whose required reviewers are configured in repo SETTINGS, a branch protection rule, or an organisation deployment policy — all of them real, enforced gates that live outside the repository. If yours is one of those, this row is wrong and nothing in the tree could have told us. Otherwise: whatever the release trigger points at is published to users unreviewed, so a mistagged or unverified commit ships and the only remedy is a follow-up release.

X10 · Duplicated predicate · Duplicated predicate · ×1

Duplicated predicate crates/macros/src/handler.rs:53 — `item && method.sig.ident == Ident::new("handle", Span::call_site())` appears character-identically in 2 files — crates/macros/src/handler.rs, crates/oapi-macros/src/endpoint.rs. 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.

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-e528356f0912446390007e31fcedb6d7/history.json --exit-code 0 --source .	18	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-e528356f0912446390007e31fcedb6d7/tree.json --exit-code 0 --source .	7	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 .	33	artifacts/raw/semgrep.json
D30 · Dependency Vulnerabilities	osv-scanner	—	osv-scanner --format json --recursive .	0	—
D30 · Dependency Vulnerabilities	trivy	—	trivy fs --scanners vuln --format json --quiet --severity CRITICAL,HIGH,MEDIUM,LOW --skip-dirs /bin/ --skip-dirs /obj/ . --skip-db-update	0	artifacts/raw/trivy-fs.json
D31 · IaC & Container Security	trivy	—	trivy config --format json --quiet .	0	artifacts/raw/trivy-config.json
D32 · Data Compliance (PII/GDPR)	semgrep	—	semgrep: not applicable — No personal data was found crossing a boundary the PII/GDPR ruleset checks — nothing written to a log or console sink, placed in a URL or query string, or persisted to browser storage. That is a clean result for the LEAK surface only: this ruleset detects personal data escaping, it does not inventory the personal data a repository holds, so it is not evidence that this repository has no personal-data surface. The personal-data map (Appendix C) and the C1-C5 compliance cards are what speak to that. semgrep could not parse 1 file(s) — `crates/oapi/src/swagger_ui/v5.32.11/swagger-ui.js` — so the PII/GDPR sweep did not cover the unparsed regions of them; rows reported elsewhere in those files are real.	0	—
D40 · Network Egress Confinement	runtime-hardening	—	runtime-hardening: not applicable — No Kubernetes/orchestration workloads found in the repository manifests; network egress policy is a cluster-native control that may live at the platform/firewall layer, so there is nothing to assess here.	0	—
D41 · Kernel & Syscall Confinement	runtime-hardening	—	runtime-hardening: not applicable — No Kubernetes/orchestration workloads found in the repository manifests; seccomp/AppArmor/SELinux confinement is a workload-level control, so there is nothing to assess here.	0	—
D42 · Runtime Threat Enforcement	runtime-hardening	—	runtime-hardening: not applicable — No Kubernetes/orchestration workloads found in the repository manifests; runtime threat-detection and admission-control policy are cluster-level controls, so there is nothing to assess here.	0	—
D43 · Malicious Dependencies	osv-scanner	—	osv-scanner --format json --recursive .	0	—
D43 · Malicious Dependencies	trivy	—	trivy fs --scanners vuln --format json --quiet --severity CRITICAL,HIGH,MEDIUM,LOW --skip-dirs /bin/ --skip-dirs /obj/ . --skip-db-update	0	artifacts/raw/trivy-fs.json

Run 01a0f26d-9ef8-782b-adf8-17b9ec126ced · every finding is also locatable in findings.md, and the complete scoring record (with exit codes + durations) in sidecar.json.

Salvo-Rs/salvo

Findings by grade

This survey was produced by

Executive summary

Top priorities

Diagnosis — what's actually going on

Architecture — module dependency graph

Architecture — module dependency matrix

At a glance — Code Health · 86% · Strong ·

At a glance — Architecture · 95% · Exemplary ·

At a glance — Maturity · 67% · Adequate · gated by M2 ·

At a glance — Readiness · 66% · Adequate · gated by D13 ·

At a glance — Security · 63% · Adequate · gated by D28, D36 ·

At a glance — Event-Driven · 10% · Critical · gated by ED1 ·

At a glance — Performance · 89% · Strong ·

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