Executive summary
straw-hat-team/beam-monorepo scores 56 out of 100, which would normally be rated Adequate, but it is rated Weak because its weakest group of dimensions, Dependencies, is rated Critical. The standard never rates a score more than one step above its weakest group, so a high average can't hide a weak area.
The weakest lens counts most in the score, and here that is Maturity, which scores 40 and is rated Weak. Its Documentation accuracy dimension scores 0 out of 10, and until that reaches 4, Maturity can't be rated higher than Adequate. The first actions are to resolve the 2 Off-boarding risk finding(s) in Bus Factor and to reconcile the README with reality: apps/trogon_commanded/README.md links to `api-reference.html`, but `apps/trogon_commanded/api-reference.html` does not exist; apps/trogon_configurable/README.md links to `api-reference.html`, but `apps/trogon_configurable/api-reference.html` does not exist; apps/trogon_dispatcher/README.md links to `build-an-accounts-dispatcher.html`, but `apps/trogon_dispatcher/build-an-accounts-dispatcher.html` does not exist; apps/trogon_dispatcher/README.md links to `compose-dispatchers.html`, but `apps/trogon_dispatcher/compose-dispatchers.html` does not exist; apps/trogon_dispatcher/README.md links to `write-middleware.html`, but `apps/trogon_dispatcher/write-middleware.html` does not exist, and if Maturity rose to 70, the score would rise from 56 to about 65.
One finding is critical, in Static Analysis (SAST).
Watchdog couldn't measure 29 dimensions in this code, among them Code Coverage, Test Reliability and License Compliance, so they are left out of the score. The product code is 21,386 lines, which would take an estimated 0.4 person-years, around €58,000, to rebuild.
If Maturity rose from 40 to 70, the lowest score rated Strong, the score would rise from 56 to about 65.
New since the last survey: 11 findings
- God Classes · FileTooLong: commanded/aggregate_state_construction.ex apps/trogon_credo/lib/trogon/credo/check/commanded/aggregate_state_construction.ex
- Code Duplication · Duplicated block (11 lines × 2) apps/trogon_credo/lib/trogon/credo/check/commanded/deterministic_command.ex
- Code Duplication · Duplicated block (9 lines × 3) apps/trogon_credo/lib/trogon/credo/check/dispatcher/dispatch_options_keys.ex
- Code Duplication · Duplicated block (8 lines × 2) apps/trogon_credo/lib/trogon/credo/check/oban/worker_name.ex
- Code Duplication · Duplicated block (7 lines × 3) apps/trogon_credo/lib/trogon/credo/check/commanded/deterministic_command.ex
- Code Duplication · Duplicated block (5 lines × 5) apps/trogon_credo/lib/trogon/credo/check/commanded/aggregate_state_construction.ex
- Code Duplication · Duplicated block (7 lines × 2) apps/trogon_credo/lib/trogon/credo/check/ecto/multi_run_repo.ex
- Code Duplication · Duplicated block (6 lines × 2) apps/trogon_credo/lib/trogon/credo/check/oban/worker_name.ex
- Supply-chain Provenance & Signing · REDACTED
- Supply-chain Provenance & Signing · REDACTED
- Supply-chain Provenance & Signing · REDACTED
Fixed since the last survey: 1 finding
- Supply-chain Provenance & Signing REDACTED
Rebuild cost: about €58,000 · Estimate
| Cost to rebuild | €19,000 to €97,000, for 323 to 1,025 hours of work, about 0.4 person-years for one engineer |
|---|---|
| Difficulty of the problem | Standard, judged from the kind of software and how it is built. Code that solves a harder problem, such as payments or medical bookings, costs more per line to write. |
| Quality factor | ×0.8 at a score of 56. Better code takes more work to write, so the factor is ×1.0 at a score of 70, lower below it and higher above it. |
| Size | Medium: 21,386 lines of product code |
Top priorities
Diagnosis: what the measurements show together
Architecture — module dependency graph
Architecture: which parts of the code depend on which
| uses → | 1 (global) | 2 Enumerable.Trogon.Error | 3 EventStoreDashboard | 4 EventStoreDashboard.Components | 5 EventStoreDashboard.Repo | 6 Mix.Tasks.Trogon.TypeProvider | 7 Trogon | 8 Trogon.Commanded | 9 Trogon.Commanded.Aggregate | 10 Trogon.Commanded.ConsistencyPolicy | 11 Trogon.Commanded.EventStore | 12 Trogon.Commanded.EventStore.JsonbSerializer | 13 Trogon.Commanded.TestSupport | 14 Trogon.Commanded.TypeProvider | 15 Trogon.Credo | 16 Trogon.Credo.Check.Commanded | 17 Trogon.Credo.Check.Design | 18 Trogon.Credo.Check.Dispatcher | 19 Trogon.Credo.Check.Ecto | 20 Trogon.Credo.Check.ExUnit | 21 Trogon.Credo.Check.Oban | 22 Trogon.Credo.Check.OpenTelemetry | 23 Trogon.Credo.Check.Readability | 24 Trogon.Credo.Check.Refactor | 25 Trogon.Credo.Check.Warning | 26 Trogon.Credo.Plugin | 27 Trogon.Credo.PluginSupport | 28 Trogon.Dispatcher | 29 Trogon.Dispatcher.OpenTelemetry | 30 Trogon.Ecto | 31 Trogon.Error | 32 Trogon.ObjectId | 33 Trogon.Proto | 34 Trogon.Proto.Env | 35 Trogon.Proto.Uuid.V1 | 36 Trogon.Result | 37 Trogon.TypeProvider | 38 TrogonProto.Actor.V1Alpha1 | 39 Trogon.Commanded.EventStore.JsonbSerializer.Serializable | 40 Trogon.Commanded.ProtobufMapper |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 (global) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 2 Enumerable.Trogon.Error | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 3 EventStoreDashboard | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 4 EventStoreDashboard.Components | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 5 EventStoreDashboard.Repo | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 6 Mix.Tasks.Trogon.TypeProvider | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 7 Trogon | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 8 Trogon.Commanded | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 9 Trogon.Commanded.Aggregate | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 10 Trogon.Commanded.ConsistencyPolicy | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 11 Trogon.Commanded.EventStore | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 12 Trogon.Commanded.EventStore.JsonbSerializer | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 13 Trogon.Commanded.TestSupport | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 14 Trogon.Commanded.TypeProvider | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 15 Trogon.Credo | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 16 Trogon.Credo.Check.Commanded | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 17 Trogon.Credo.Check.Design | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 18 Trogon.Credo.Check.Dispatcher | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 19 Trogon.Credo.Check.Ecto | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 20 Trogon.Credo.Check.ExUnit | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 21 Trogon.Credo.Check.Oban | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 22 Trogon.Credo.Check.OpenTelemetry | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 23 Trogon.Credo.Check.Readability | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 24 Trogon.Credo.Check.Refactor | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 25 Trogon.Credo.Check.Warning | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 26 Trogon.Credo.Plugin | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 27 Trogon.Credo.PluginSupport | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 28 Trogon.Dispatcher | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 29 Trogon.Dispatcher.OpenTelemetry | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 30 Trogon.Ecto | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 31 Trogon.Error | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 32 Trogon.ObjectId | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 33 Trogon.Proto | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 34 Trogon.Proto.Env | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 35 Trogon.Proto.Uuid.V1 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 36 Trogon.Result | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 37 Trogon.TypeProvider | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 38 TrogonProto.Actor.V1Alpha1 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 39 Trogon.Commanded.EventStore.JsonbSerializer.Serializable | 1 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 40 Trogon.Commanded.ProtobufMapper | 1 |
39→12 Trogon.Commanded.EventStore.JsonbSerializer.Serializable uses Trogon.Commanded.EventStore.JsonbSerializer✕
- Connections
- 1 pair of types, where a type in Trogon.Commanded.EventStore.JsonbSerializer.Serializable uses a type in Trogon.Commanded.EventStore.JsonbSerializer.
- The types involved
Trogon.Commanded.EventStore.JsonbSerializer.Serializable.Any→Trogon.Commanded.EventStore.JsonbSerializer.Serializable
- Direction
- Trogon.Commanded.EventStore.JsonbSerializer.Serializable uses Trogon.Commanded.EventStore.JsonbSerializer, so a change to Trogon.Commanded.EventStore.JsonbSerializer can break Trogon.Commanded.EventStore.JsonbSerializer.Serializable, while a change to Trogon.Commanded.EventStore.JsonbSerializer.Serializable can't break Trogon.Commanded.EventStore.JsonbSerializer.
- Position
- Below the diagonal: Trogon.Commanded.EventStore.JsonbSerializer.Serializable uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
40→8 Trogon.Commanded.ProtobufMapper uses Trogon.Commanded✕
- Connections
- 1 pair of types, where a type in Trogon.Commanded.ProtobufMapper uses a type in Trogon.Commanded.
- The types involved
Trogon.Commanded.ProtobufMapper.Any→Trogon.Commanded.ProtobufMapper
- Direction
- Trogon.Commanded.ProtobufMapper uses Trogon.Commanded, so a change to Trogon.Commanded can break Trogon.Commanded.ProtobufMapper, while a change to Trogon.Commanded.ProtobufMapper can't break Trogon.Commanded.
- Position
- Below the diagonal: Trogon.Commanded.ProtobufMapper uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
At a glance — Code Health
At a glance — Architecture
At a glance — Maturity
At a glance — Readiness
At a glance — Security
At a glance — Domain Modelling
Security & Compliance — OWASP Top-10 mapping
| OWASP category | Findings | Severity |
|---|---|---|
| A03:2025 — Software Supply Chain Failures | 6 | Medium |
| A05:2025 — Injection | 1 | High / Critical |
Roadmap
First, reconcile all documentation to ensure links and descriptions match the actual codebase, and establish a dedicated folder for Architecture Decision Records to capture key design choices. Next, address the two off-boarding risks to reduce bus factor and prevent knowledge silos. Finally, integrate a static analysis security check into the continuous integration pipeline to automatically block regressions, while continuing to maintain the high quality of existing project guides.
| Do this | Helps | Effort | Dimension |
|---|---|---|---|
| Resolve the 2 Off-boarding risk finding(s) in Bus Factor. | +5.3 pts | Low | Bus Factor |
| Reconcile the README with reality: apps/trogon_commanded/README.md links to `api-reference.html`, but `apps/trogon_commanded/api-reference.html` does not exist; apps/trogon_configurable/README.md links to `api-reference.html`, but `apps/trogon_configurable/api-reference.html` does not exist; apps/trogon_dispatcher/README.md links to `build-an-accounts-dispatcher.html`, but `apps/trogon_dispatcher/build-an-accounts-dispatcher.html` does not exist; apps/trogon_dispatcher/README.md links to `compose-dispatchers.html`, but `apps/trogon_dispatcher/compose-dispatchers.html` does not exist; apps/trogon_dispatcher/README.md links to `write-middleware.html`, but `apps/trogon_dispatcher/write-middleware.html` does not exist. | +7.5 pts | Medium | Documentation accuracy |
| Record your significant design decisions. Write one short document per decision, giving its date, the situation, the decision and its consequences, and keep them together with your other design documents. A docs/adr folder with each file named by number and title is the easiest place to find them. | +5.9 pts | Medium | Architecture documentation |
| Add a SAST step to CI running what this repository's stack ships: sobelow (Elixir/Phoenix) — or `semgrep --config=auto`, which runs on any language — so a security regression fails the build instead of landing. | +3.1 pts | Medium | Security & performance tooling |
| Improve Documentation Quality — currently 8.9/10. | +2.5 pts | Medium | Documentation Quality |
| Resolve the 2 REDACTED finding(s) in Supply-chain Provenance & Signing — start with REDACTED, REDACTED. | +0.6 pts | Low | Supply-chain Provenance & Signing |
| Add an explicit build step to your CI pipeline — your stack's own build command, or, if the pipeline delegates to a task runner, a build task that runner executes in CI — so every change is built before merge. | +1.1 pts | Medium | CI/CD gates |
| Add a build/run (quick start) section to the root README — the first thing a newcomer needs. | +1.0 pts | Medium | Documentation (README) |
File quality
| File | Score | Band | Worst signal |
|---|---|---|---|
| apps/trogon_commanded/lib/trogon/commanded/type_provider.ex | 6.7 | Mixed | Explicit Debt: TodoComment |
| REDACTED | 7.2 | Mixed | Static Analysis (SAST): High: REDACTED |
| apps/trogon_object_id/lib/trogon/object_id.ex | 7.4 | Mixed | Code Duplication: Duplicated block (10 lines × 2) |
| apps/trogon_credo/lib/trogon/credo/check/commanded/aggregate_state_construction.ex | 7.8 | Mixed | God Classes: FileTooLong: commanded/aggregate_state_construction.ex |
| apps/trogon_credo/lib/trogon/credo/check/commanded/deterministic_command.ex | 7.8 | Mixed | Code Duplication: Duplicated block (11 lines × 2) |
| apps/trogon_credo/lib/trogon/credo/check/warning/forbidden_import.ex | 7.8 | Mixed | Code Duplication: Duplicated block (9 lines × 2) |
| apps/trogon_credo/lib/trogon/credo/check/oban/worker_name.ex | 7.8 | Mixed | Code Duplication: Duplicated block (8 lines × 2) |
| REDACTED | 7.9 | Mixed | Supply-chain Provenance & Signing: REDACTED |
| REDACTED | 7.9 | Mixed | Supply-chain Provenance & Signing: REDACTED |
| REDACTED | 7.9 | Mixed | Supply-chain Provenance & Signing: REDACTED |
| apps/trogon_typeprovider/lib/trogon/type_provider.ex | 8.2 | Near-clean | Explicit Debt: TodoComment |
| apps/trogon_error/lib/trogon/error.ex | 8.2 | Near-clean | Explicit Debt: TodoComment |
| apps/trogon_proto/lib/trogon/proto/env.ex | 8.5 | Near-clean | God Classes: FileTooLong: proto/env.ex |
| apps/trogon_credo/lib/trogon/credo/check/warning/forbidden_function_call.ex | 8.5 | Near-clean | God Classes: FileTooLong: warning/forbidden_function_call.ex |
| apps/trogon_credo/lib/trogon/credo/check/design/namespace_boundary.ex | 8.5 | Near-clean | God Classes: TooManyFunctions: NamespaceBoundary |
| apps/eventstore_dashboard/lib/event_store_dashboard/components/streams_table.ex | 8.5 | Near-clean | Code Duplication: Duplicated block (10–18 lines × 2) |
| apps/trogon_credo/lib/trogon/credo/check/dispatcher/dispatch_options_keys.ex | 8.5 | Near-clean | Code Duplication: Duplicated block (9 lines × 3) |
| apps/trogon_commanded/lib/trogon/commanded/consistency_policy/exact_version_policy.ex | 8.5 | Near-clean | Code Duplication: Duplicated block (5 lines × 2) |
| apps/trogon_commanded/lib/trogon/commanded/event_store/jsonb_serializer.ex | 8.5 | Near-clean | Code Duplication: Duplicated block (9 lines × 2) |
| apps/trogon_credo/lib/trogon/credo/check/ecto/multi_run_repo.ex | 8.5 | Near-clean | Code Duplication: Duplicated block (7 lines × 2) |
How the grades work
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.
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.
Recorded, with no effect on how the codebase functions. Present so the survey is complete, not because it needs doing.
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. 35 of 39 evaluated dimensions are computed purely by tools and static analysis (confidence 1.0); 4 documentation/naming judgement(s) are LLM-assisted and labelled advisory. Overall confidence is 0.8 — the weighted average across measured dimensions; it falls as more of the score leans on LLM-assisted judgement and rises when it's fully tool-backed.
What we checked — 39 dimensions across the health lenses
- 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, 51 of 62 do; the remainder are repo-wide signals — a dimension-level measurement, not a single line.
- 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.
Tools & methods
| Method | Backs | Version | Evaluator |
|---|---|---|---|
| Roslyn static analysis | Complexity, cohesion, coupling, dead code, API surface, layering | 5.3.0 | ✓ deterministic |
| Native secret scanner | Hardcoded secrets / credentials | 1.0.0 | ✓ deterministic |
| Watchdog duplication detector (in-process) | Code duplication | 1.0.0 | ✓ deterministic |
| Coverage (coverlet / dotnet-coverage) | Line & branch coverage | 10.0.400 | ✓ deterministic |
| NuGet / dotnet | Outdated, vulnerable & deprecated dependencies | 10.0.400 | ✓ deterministic |
| git / LibGit2Sharp | Churn hotspots, knowledge concentration, history | 2.43.0 · 0.31.0 | ✓ deterministic |
| gitleaks · semgrep · trivy | Secrets in history, SAST, CVEs, IaC & container, PII / GDPR | 1.86.0 · 0.69.3 | ✓ deterministic |
| LLM (sampled · advisory) | Documentation quality, ADR conformance, naming — sampled over a bounded sample; advisory, never a deterministic measurement | Local LLM | ◐ LLM · sampled · advisory |
Run transparency — what happened this run
- 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 MEASURED: test source is present (.exs, .ex) but the built-in coverage collector has no runner for this repository's ecosystem — so this suite was never executed by it. Not scored — this is a gap in the analyzer's language coverage, not a defect in the repo. To have real coverage read, produce a coverage report in a standard format (lcov — `mix test --cover` with `excoveralls` (`mix coveralls.lcov`)) 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 — `mix test --cover` with `excoveralls` (`mix coveralls.lcov`)) and commit it — a hosted scan measures a clone of the repository, so a report that exists only in a working tree, a CI runner's or your own, never reaches it; the artefact is commonly gitignored, so `git add -f` that one file (or un-ignore its path) and commit it alongside the code it measures — then the real number is read on the next scan.
- D11 Test Reliability — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. Test source is present (.exs, .ex) but the built-in reliability runner does not support this repository's ecosystem, so flakiness couldn't be assessed. Not scored — this is a gap in the analyzer's language coverage, not a finding about this repository.
- 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's package manifest is not parsed for licence data yet. A gap in the analyzer's language coverage, NOT a finding that the repository's licenses are compliant (an Elixir mix.exs/mix.lock (Hex)), which this pass does not parse yet — so this dimension asserts nothing about this repository's licensing in either direction.
- D22 Internal API Consistency — 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. D22 identifies the intentionally-exposed surface from `IsPackable` and `.Contracts` project names, MSBuild conventions read off the loaded project set. This target exposed no such projects, so the probe never ran; this says nothing about whether the repository has a public API. This repository commits no C#/VB source at all, so there was never an MSBuild project set to read these conventions off. That is OUR side and it is a COLLECTOR gap, not an environment fault: it declares a published package (apps/eventstore_dashboard/mix.exs), but no published-package marker D22 reads admitted any project here, so this ecosystem's public API has no collector, and the remedy is to write one — no change to the scan image can close it.
- D27 Navigability — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. Navigability is taken over call sites whose callee resolved. For C# that population includes calls into referenced assemblies; for this language only calls declared inside the repository count, so the abstention threshold reads the repository's use of its standard library as a resolution failure. That is a limit of this analyzer, not a build problem in this repository.
- 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.
- DM9 Scattered domain decisions — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. Not measured — scattered-decision detection needs expression-level symbol resolution: a comparison operand bound to the member it judges (arm one) and a construction bound to the type it produces (arm two). A Roslyn compilation carries both; arm two alone also runs on any frontend that declares whether a construction is produced or passed, and this target loaded neither.
- GD1 Unfinished & placeholder code — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check reads C# syntax, F#, JavaScript/TypeScript, Dart, Ruby and Scala source only, and no C#, F#, JavaScript/TypeScript, Dart, Ruby or Scala was found, and this repository's Elixir is not read yet, so it had nothing of this repository's product to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
- IC1 Incompleteness & stubs — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check reads C# syntax, JavaScript/TypeScript, Java, Dart, Ruby and Scala source only, and no C#, JavaScript/TypeScript, Java, Dart, Ruby or Scala was found, and this repository's Elixir is not read yet, so it had nothing of this repository's product to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
- P8 Schema migrations — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check reads EF Core usage in C# and the schema tooling its file scan recognises only, and no .NET project was loaded, and this repository's language is not one the scan models, 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.
- X1 Async correctness — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check reads C# syntax, and JavaScript/TypeScript, Python, Dart, Ruby, Scala, Rust and Kotlin source only, and no C# was loaded and no JavaScript/TypeScript, Python, Dart, Ruby, Scala, Rust or Kotlin was found in this repository, so it had nothing of this repository's product to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
- X12 Unreachable branch — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check reads C# syntax, and JavaScript/TypeScript, Python, Dart, Ruby, Scala and Kotlin source only, and no C# was loaded and no JavaScript/TypeScript, Python, Dart, Ruby, Scala or Kotlin was found in this repository, so it had nothing of this repository's product to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
- X13 Undrained process stream — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check reads C# syntax, and JavaScript/TypeScript, Python, Dart, Ruby, Scala and Kotlin source only, and no C# was loaded and no JavaScript/TypeScript, Python, Dart, Ruby, Scala or Kotlin was found in this repository, so it had nothing of this repository's product to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
- 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 reads C# syntax, and JavaScript/TypeScript, Java, Kotlin, Scala, Rust, Swift, Ruby, Dart, PHP, Python and Go source only, and no C# was loaded and no JavaScript/TypeScript, Java, Kotlin, Scala, Rust, Swift, Ruby, Dart, PHP, Python or Go 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.
- 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 reads C# syntax, and JavaScript/TypeScript, Java, Kotlin, Scala, PHP, Ruby, Python, Go, Rust and Dart source only, and no C# was loaded and no JavaScript/TypeScript, Java, Kotlin, Scala, PHP, Ruby, Python, Go, Rust or Dart 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.
- 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 reads C# syntax, and JavaScript/TypeScript, Java, PHP, Dart, Ruby, Scala and Kotlin source only, and no C# was loaded and no JavaScript/TypeScript, Java, PHP, Dart, Ruby, Scala or Kotlin was found in this repository, so it had nothing of this repository's product to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
- X17 Uncapped recursion over a caller-supplied document — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check reads C# syntax, and JavaScript/TypeScript, Python, Dart, Ruby, Scala and Kotlin source only, and no C# was loaded and no JavaScript/TypeScript, Python, Dart, Ruby, Scala or Kotlin was found in this repository, so it had nothing of this repository's product to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
- 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 reads C# syntax, and JavaScript/TypeScript, Java, Kotlin, Dart, Ruby, Scala and PHP source only, and no C# was loaded and no JavaScript/TypeScript, Java, Kotlin, Dart, Ruby, Scala or PHP 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.
- 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 reads C# syntax, and JavaScript/TypeScript, Java, Kotlin, Python, Dart, Ruby, Scala and PHP source only, and no C# was loaded and no JavaScript/TypeScript, Java, Kotlin, Python, Dart, Ruby, Scala or PHP 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.
- 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 reads C# syntax, and JavaScript/TypeScript, Go, PHP, Dart, Kotlin, Ruby, Scala, Java, Python and Rust source only, and no C# was loaded and no JavaScript/TypeScript, Go, PHP, Dart, Kotlin, Ruby, Scala, Java, Python or Rust 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.
- 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 reads C# syntax, and JavaScript/TypeScript, Java, F#, Python, Dart, Ruby, Scala, Kotlin and PHP source only, and no C# was loaded and no JavaScript/TypeScript, Java, F#, Python, Dart, Ruby, Scala, Kotlin or PHP was found in this repository, so it had nothing of this repository's product to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
- X24 Document value interpolated into markup unescaped — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check reads C# syntax, and JavaScript/TypeScript, Java, Scala, Ruby and Python source only, and no C# was loaded and no JavaScript/TypeScript, Java, Scala, Ruby or Python was found in this repository, so it had nothing of this repository's product to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
- 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 reads C# syntax, and JavaScript/TypeScript, Java, Kotlin, Scala, PHP, Erlang, Python, Dart and Ruby source only, and no C# was loaded and no JavaScript/TypeScript, Java, Kotlin, Scala, PHP, Erlang, Python, Dart or Ruby was found in this repository, so it had nothing of this repository's product to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
- X27 Collection changed while being enumerated — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check reads C# syntax, and Java, Rust, Erlang, F#, Python, Dart, Ruby, Scala and Kotlin source only, and no C# was loaded, no Java, Rust, Erlang, F#, Python, Dart, Ruby, Scala or Kotlin was found, and this repository's Elixir is not read yet, so it had nothing of this repository's product to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
- X29 Per-element action decided by a fixed element — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check reads C# syntax, and JavaScript/TypeScript, Java, Rust, Dart, Ruby, Scala and Kotlin source only, and no C# was loaded and no JavaScript/TypeScript, Java, Rust, Dart, Ruby, Scala or Kotlin was found in this repository, so it had nothing of this repository's product to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
- 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 reads C# syntax, and PHP, Java, Kotlin, Python, Ruby, Scala, Dart, Swift, Erlang, Go and JavaScript/TypeScript source only, and no C# was loaded and no PHP, Java, Kotlin, Python, Ruby, Scala, Dart, Swift, Erlang, Go, JavaScript or 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.
- 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 reads C# syntax, and Scala, JavaScript/TypeScript, Java, Kotlin, Python, PHP, Go, Rust, Dart and Ruby source only, and no C# was loaded and no Scala, JavaScript, TypeScript, Java, Kotlin, Python, PHP, Go, Rust, Dart or Ruby was found in this repository, so it had nothing of this repository's product to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
- X4 Structured logging — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check reads C# syntax, and JavaScript/TypeScript, Java, Kotlin, Python, PHP, Dart, Ruby, Scala and Rust source only, and no C# was loaded and no JavaScript/TypeScript, Java, Kotlin, Python, PHP, Dart, Ruby, Scala or Rust 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.
- X7 Silent fallback defaults — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check reads C#, Python, TypeScript/JavaScript, Rust, Go, Java, Kotlin, Scala, PHP, Ruby, Swift and Dart syntax only, and no C#, Python, TypeScript/JavaScript, Rust, Go, Java, Kotlin, Scala, PHP, Ruby, Swift or Dart was loaded for 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.
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
- 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.
- D12 Dependency Hygiene: Dependency health reads manifests and lockfiles — a vulnerability in a vendored/copied dependency, or risk from how a dependency is actually used, is outside this view.
- D13 Secret Scanning: Secret detection is signature- and entropy-based on the current tree — a secret that does not match a known pattern, or one already rotated, will not be flagged (a clean scan is "nothing matched", not "no secrets exist").
- D15 Churn × Complexity Hotspots: Churn hotspots come from git history — a freshly imported or squashed repository has no churn signal, and recent rewrites can mask a historically risky file.
- D16 Bus Factor: Bus-factor is a time-decayed model of commit attribution (who has recently, repeatedly worked a file), not comprehension — pairing, review and reading-without-committing spread knowledge it can't see; bot commits and shared accounts still distort it.
- D17 Explicit Debt: Acknowledged-debt signals (TODO/FIXME, suppressions, dead code) are textual — undocumented debt that nobody marked, and debt that lives in design rather than annotations, is invisible. Committed machine-written code (scaffolded migrations, designer/codegen output, generated stubs) is excluded — it is never the team's dead code to delete.
- D19 Documentation Quality: Documentation quality is judged by an LLM over a bounded sample of docs — it reads what is written, not whether the docs match the running system, and it is advisory, not a measurement. Its critique rows are drawn from a closed category vocabulary and each row means the same thing in every run, so two scans can be compared row by row; the SET that fires is still a sample, and does not repeat exactly. Measured on one frozen input, six scans at one engine SHA: 2-5 critique rows per scan, 8 distinct rows across the six, 3 of those 8 seen in only one scan. So a D19 row is evidence about the documentation, but a COUNT of D19 rows is not a quantity — never read a change in it as an improvement or a regression.
- D21 Naming Consistency: Naming quality is an LLM judgement over a bounded sample — it assesses clarity/consistency of the names it sees, not domain-correctness, and is advisory.
- 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.
- 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.
- DM6 Domain ↔ infrastructure boundary: Infrastructure reached through a hand-rolled wrapper, a domain-named facade, reflection, or a string-keyed service locator resolves to a non-infra type and isn't seen; the body scan is symbol resolution over syntax, not full dataflow. A clean result means "no resolved infra reference in a domain body", not a proof of purity.
- M4 Documentation accuracy: Onboarding quality is an LLM read of the docs/setup present — it cannot run the onboarding or measure how long a real new joiner takes; the verdict is sampled and advisory.
- P4 Deployment & Rollback: Approval/branch-protection rules live in repository settings the scan cannot see — only their in-repo evidence (config files, workflows) is checked, so a control enforced purely in the host's settings reads as "not evidenced".
- 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
Dimensions
D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity
0 function(s) exceeded the cyclomatic complexity threshold of 15.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity
0 function(s) exceeded the cognitive complexity threshold of 15.
D3 · God Classes
4 over-large unit(s) detected — types, modules or files that carry too much.
What to do
- Resolve the 3 FileTooLong finding(s) in God Classes — start with aggregate_state_construction.ex, env.ex, forbidden_function_call.ex. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (3 warning-level).
- Resolve the 1 TooManyFunctions finding(s) in God Classes — start with namespace_boundary.ex. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).
- Enforce God Classes in CI to reach Verified (currently Documented). — Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Prevented — provenance only; does not change the score.
D4 · Code Duplication
17 duplicated block group(s) detected.
What to do
- Resolve the 3 Duplicated block (8 lines × 2) finding(s) in Code Duplication — start with worker_name.ex, object_id.ex, enum.ex. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (3 warning-level).
- Resolve the 2 Duplicated block (11 lines × 2) finding(s) in Code Duplication — start with deterministic_command.ex, type_provider.ex. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (2 warning-level).
- Resolve the 2 Duplicated block (9 lines × 2) finding(s) in Code Duplication — start with forbidden_import.ex, jsonb_serializer.ex. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (2 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.
D5 · Coupling
11 production modules (OTP), 0 dependency cycle(s), 0 unstable depended-on module(s). Read from the build's own module declarations; 1 module(s) off the main sequence.
What to do
- Resolve the 1 Off the main sequence finding(s) in Coupling. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).
- Enforce Coupling in CI to reach Verified (currently Documented). — Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Prevented — provenance only; does not change the score.
D6 · Cohesion (LCOM4)
0 of 4 classes have LCOM4 above 3.
D12 · Dependency Hygiene
0 outdated, 0 retired direct Hex dependencies, 0 pinning defect(s). 1 of 90 direct dependencies were graded against hex.pm (0 not published there, 89 not resolved by a committed lockfile). Whether any of these packages is UNMAINTAINED is not graded — hex.pm publishes no maintenance status, and release age does not stand in for one. Whether any is UNUSED is not graded either: a Hex app name does not determine the modules it provides (`ecto_sql` provides Ecto.Adapters.SQL), and a large idiomatic class of BEAM dependencies — runtime adapters, codec plugins, protocol implementations and OTP applications the release starts — is correctly declared and never referenced in source, so absence of a reference is not evidence of an unused dependency. Known CVEs in this dependency graph are D30's question, read from mix.lock there.
What to do
- Enforce Dependency Hygiene in CI to reach Verified (currently Documented). — Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Verified — provenance only; does not change the score.
D13 · Secret Scanning
Secret scan ran and found no leaked secrets.
D15 · Churn × Complexity Hotspots
No churn × complexity hotspots in the window.
D16 · Bus Factor
44 source file(s) have their living knowledge concentrated in one author (≥90% of recent, decayed contribution). The largest is apps/trogon_proto/lib/trogon/proto/env.ex. Counted over 99 of the 178 production source files in this repository: the rest are under the ~2,400-byte size floor this dimension measures over.
What to do
- Resolve the 2 Off-boarding risk finding(s) in Bus Factor. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (2 recommendation-level).
D17 · Explicit Debt
3 deducted task-comment markers across 21386 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.
What to do
- Resolve the 3 TodoComment finding(s) in Explicit Debt — start with type_provider.ex (2), error.ex. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (3 warning-level).
- Enforce Explicit Debt in CI to reach Verified (currently Documented). — Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Prevented — provenance only; does not change the score.
D19 · Documentation Quality
The repository's root README is excellent at describing the umbrella BEAM monorepo and its packages (trogon_error, trogon_result, Trogon.Commanded, Trogon.Credo, Trogon.Dispatcher, Trogon.Ecto, Trogon.ObjectId, Trogon.Proto, Trogon.Result, Trogon.Test), explaining why they are kept in one place rather than separate repos, and naming the teams who maintain them. The mascots README is a focused README for its directory (mascots/). Each apps/trogon_... README documents its own directory instead of the repository root; none of these are flagged as missing because they are per-directory docs. The Trogon Dispatcher project's documentation is excellent: a README with an overview (compile-time type mapping from string names to Elixir structs), usage examples (registering types with prefix, importing providers), and architecture docs covering the compile-time model, why handlers take the message and context, middleware composition, how dispatches are resolved, prior-art comparisons, and OpenTelemetry tracing. The READMEs for each subdirectory (apps/trogon_typeprovider/README.md, mascots/assets/joe/README.md) document their own directories rather than the repository as a whole, so they fall under internal-subdirectory scope and do not trigger the missing-overview or missing-installation categories. The Trogon.Dispatcher documentation is clear and well-structured for a middleware-writing tutorial: it opens with an overview of what a middleware is (a plain module implementing `Trogon.Dispatcher.Middleware`) and shows code examples for init/1, call/3, assigns/private, per-message facts, and the full contract on call/3's arguments. It also builds a small accounts dispatcher from scratch in a tutorial, covering message struct definitions, handler matching, middleware policy application, and dispatch wiring, with an outline confirming every section exists. The two READMEs are well written for their respective topics.
What to do
- Improve Documentation Quality — currently 8.9/10. — The repository's root README is excellent at describing the umbrella BEAM monorepo and its packages (trogon_error, trogon_result, Trogon.Commanded, Trogon.Credo, Trogon.Dispatcher, Trogon.Ecto, Trogon.ObjectId, Trogon.Proto, Trogon.Result, Trogon.Test), explaining why they are kept in one place rather than separate repos, and naming the teams who maintain them. The mascots README is a focused README for its directory (mascots/). Each apps/trogon_... README documents its own directory instead of the repository root; none of these are flagged as missing because they are per-directory docs. The Trogon Dispatcher project's documentation is excellent: a README with an overview (compile-time type mapping from string names to Elixir structs), usage examples (registering types with prefix, importing providers), and architecture docs covering the compile-time model, why handlers take the message and context, middleware composition, how dispatches are resolved, prior-art comparisons, and OpenTelemetry tracing. The READMEs for each subdirectory (apps/trogon_typeprovider/README.md, mascots/assets/joe/README.md) document their own directories rather than the repository as a whole, so they fall under internal-subdirectory scope and do not trigger the missing-overview or missing-installation categories. The Trogon.Dispatcher documentation is clear and well-structured for a middleware-writing tutorial: it opens with an overview of what a middleware is (a plain module implementing `Trogon.Dispatcher.Middleware`) and shows code examples for init/1, call/3, assigns/private, per-message facts, and the full contract on call/3's arguments. It also builds a small accounts dispatcher from scratch in a tutorial, covering message struct definitions, handler matching, middleware policy application, and dispatch wiring, with an outline confirming every section exists. The two READMEs are well written for their respective topics.
D21 · Naming Consistency
0 naming inconsistencies across 0 sampled symbols.
D26 · Project Cohesion
1 of 11 build units (Mix) flagged as possibly oversized/incoherent.
What to do
- Resolve the 1 Projects may be oversized for their cohesion finding(s) in Project Cohesion. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 recommendation-level).
D28 · Secrets (history)
gitleaks scanned the full history AND the current working tree and found no secrets.
D29 · Static Analysis (SAST)
1 finding(s): 0 critical, 1 high, 0 medium, 0 low. semgrep hit a parse error in 1 file(s) — `mascots/assets/joe/source-file.eps` — so no absence of findings in them is evidence of anything, and nothing in them was analysed. Fix the syntax error (or exclude the file deliberately) and re-scan to cover them.
What to do
- Resolve the 1 REDACTED finding(s) in Static Analysis (SAST) — start with REDACTED. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 issue-level).
D30 · Dependency Vulnerabilities
No known-vulnerable dependencies in any ecosystem this repository declares.
D34 · Knowledge Freshness
Every significant source file has living knowledge — recently and meaningfully worked. Counted over 99 of the 178 production source files in this repository: the rest are under the ~2,400-byte size floor this dimension measures over.
D35 · Change Coupling
No strong hidden change-coupling between production files.
D36 · Supply-chain Provenance & Signing
1/4 supply-chain integrity signals present (provenance, signing, SBOM, pinned actions).
What to do
- Resolve the 2 REDACTED finding(s) in Supply-chain Provenance & Signing — start with REDACTED, REDACTED. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (2 warning-level).
- Resolve the 1 REDACTED finding(s) in Supply-chain Provenance & Signing — start with REDACTED. — 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).
D43 · Malicious Dependencies
No dependency in any ecosystem this repository declares is published as malicious.
D44 · Platform End-of-Life
0 end-of-life runtime(s) and 0 end-of-life framework(s), read from 2 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.
Frontend & cross-cutting dimensions
AX10 · Code composition
What to do
- The domain core is a small share of production code, but most of the rest matched no layer vocabulary at all — so this is not yet an anemic-domain finding. The namespace/path convention could not place that code, which makes the composition above a statement about the naming, not about the design. Name the layers (or check that the repository's conventions differ from the ones this check knows) before reading a thin domain into it.
AX3 · Project dependency cycles
AX4 · Dependency direction
AX8 · Test isolation
DM12 · Ambient inputs in the domain
DM6 · Domain ↔ infrastructure boundary
DM8 · Value-object opportunities
M1 · Documentation (README)
What to do
- Add a build/run (quick start) section to the root README — the first thing a newcomer needs.
- Explain in the README how to run the tests. Add a section called Testing to the README in the repository's top folder, saying how to run the test suite.
- Add an 'Architecture' / 'How it works' section to the root README — the high-level shape.
M2 · Architecture documentation
- No Architecture Decision Records found — no conventional ADR directory, no numbered `NNNN-title` documents in any markup this check reads, and nothing ADR-shaped by content. Design rationale recorded elsewhere (a design-notes tree, a mailing list, pull-request discussion) is not visible to this check and is not re-findable per decision, so a future maintainer cannot ask why one choice was made and get an answer.
What to do
- Record your significant design decisions. Write one short document per decision, giving its date, the situation, the decision and its consequences, and keep them together with your other design documents. A docs/adr folder with each file named by number and title is the easiest place to find them.
M3 · Folder & project structure
- Production code isn't grouped under a src/ folder — it's spread across several top-level directories, so there's no one place that says 'this is the product'.
What to do
- Group production code under src/ (or split deliberately, e.g. backend/ + frontend/) so production and tooling code aren't mixed at the root.
M4 · Documentation accuracy
- apps/trogon_commanded/README.md links to `api-reference.html`, but `apps/trogon_commanded/api-reference.html` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — apps/trogon_commanded/README.md:15
- apps/trogon_configurable/README.md links to `api-reference.html`, but `apps/trogon_configurable/api-reference.html` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — apps/trogon_configurable/README.md:15
- apps/trogon_dispatcher/README.md links to `build-an-accounts-dispatcher.html`, but `apps/trogon_dispatcher/build-an-accounts-dispatcher.html` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — apps/trogon_dispatcher/README.md:64
- apps/trogon_dispatcher/README.md links to `compose-dispatchers.html`, but `apps/trogon_dispatcher/compose-dispatchers.html` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — apps/trogon_dispatcher/README.md:68
- apps/trogon_dispatcher/README.md links to `write-middleware.html`, but `apps/trogon_dispatcher/write-middleware.html` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — apps/trogon_dispatcher/README.md:69
- apps/trogon_dispatcher/README.md links to `test-with-mox.html`, but `apps/trogon_dispatcher/test-with-mox.html` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — apps/trogon_dispatcher/README.md:70
- apps/trogon_dispatcher/README.md links to `observe-with-telemetry.html`, but `apps/trogon_dispatcher/observe-with-telemetry.html` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — apps/trogon_dispatcher/README.md:71
- apps/trogon_dispatcher/README.md links to `trace-with-opentelemetry.html`, but `apps/trogon_dispatcher/trace-with-opentelemetry.html` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — apps/trogon_dispatcher/README.md:72
- apps/trogon_dispatcher/README.md links to `why-wrapping-middleware.html`, but `apps/trogon_dispatcher/why-wrapping-middleware.html` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — apps/trogon_dispatcher/README.md:76
- apps/trogon_dispatcher/README.md links to `handlers-and-context.html`, but `apps/trogon_dispatcher/handlers-and-context.html` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — apps/trogon_dispatcher/README.md:77
- apps/trogon_dispatcher/README.md links to `compile-time-model.html`, but `apps/trogon_dispatcher/compile-time-model.html` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — apps/trogon_dispatcher/README.md:78
- apps/trogon_dispatcher/README.md links to `api-reference.html`, but `apps/trogon_dispatcher/api-reference.html` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — apps/trogon_dispatcher/README.md:82
- apps/trogon_error/README.md links to `api-reference.html`, but `apps/trogon_error/api-reference.html` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — apps/trogon_error/README.md:15
- apps/trogon_proto/README.md links to `api-reference.html`, but `apps/trogon_proto/api-reference.html` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — apps/trogon_proto/README.md:14
- apps/trogon_result/README.md links to `api-reference.html`, but `apps/trogon_result/api-reference.html` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — apps/trogon_result/README.md:15
- apps/trogon_test/README.md names `config/test.exs`, but no file or folder `config/test.exs` exists. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — apps/trogon_test/README.md:27
- apps/trogon_dispatcher/docs/how-to/observe-with-telemetry.md links to `trace-with-opentelemetry.html`, but `apps/trogon_dispatcher/docs/how-to/trace-with-opentelemetry.html` does not exist. Checked without a model against the repository: its files and folders, the scripts and dependencies of every package.json, the projects, namespaces, package references and target frameworks of the .NET build, the SDK and Node pins, and the identifiers of every file that is not a document; the documents' own text never counts. A footprint generated at build time, read only by a platform, or living outside this repository is not seen, and this row is then wrong. — apps/trogon_dispatcher/docs/how-to/observe-with-telemetry.md:41
What to do
- Reconcile the README with reality: apps/trogon_commanded/README.md links to `api-reference.html`, but `apps/trogon_commanded/api-reference.html` does not exist; apps/trogon_configurable/README.md links to `api-reference.html`, but `apps/trogon_configurable/api-reference.html` does not exist; apps/trogon_dispatcher/README.md links to `build-an-accounts-dispatcher.html`, but `apps/trogon_dispatcher/build-an-accounts-dispatcher.html` does not exist; apps/trogon_dispatcher/README.md links to `compose-dispatchers.html`, but `apps/trogon_dispatcher/compose-dispatchers.html` does not exist; apps/trogon_dispatcher/README.md links to `write-middleware.html`, but `apps/trogon_dispatcher/write-middleware.html` does not exist.
P1 · CI/CD gates
- A CI pipeline exists but no build step was matched — changes may merge without the build ever running. A build step may be invoked directly as a command, or declared as a task that a runner named in the pipeline resolves.
What to do
- Add an explicit build step to your CI pipeline — your stack's own build command, or, if the pipeline delegates to a task runner, a build task that runner executes in CI — so every change is built before merge.
P10 · Library API & versioning
P3 · Security & performance tooling
- No static application security testing detected. For this repository's stack, add sobelow (Elixir/Phoenix) (or `semgrep --config=auto`, which runs on any language) as a CI step. What was searched, so you can tell an absence from a miss: the 4038 CI workflow file(s) in this repository, and the scanner and linter configuration checked in beside them. A scan that runs outside CI, one configured in your forge's web UI rather than in a committed file, or a tool whose name is none of those this check carries, is not seen — if that is your case the row is wrong, and saying so is more useful than adding a second scanner.
What to do
- Add a SAST step to CI running what this repository's stack ships: sobelow (Elixir/Phoenix) — or `semgrep --config=auto`, which runs on any language — so a security regression fails the build instead of landing.
- Add gitleaks/trufflehog in CI to block PRs that introduce committed secrets.
P4 · Deployment & Rollback
P6 · Release Hygiene
X28 · Index access outside its own emptiness guard
Reference — by lens
| Lens | Score | Rating | Impact |
|---|---|---|---|
| Code Health | 98% | Exemplary | Solid. |
| Architecture | 98% | Exemplary | Solid. |
| Maturity | 40% | Weak — gated by M2, M4 | Capped at Fair by a Critical contributor — resolve it before relying on this lens. |
| Readiness | 47% | Weak — gated by D12, P3 | Capped at Fair by a Critical contributor — resolve it before relying on this lens. |
| Security | 85% | Adequate — gated by D36 | Capped at Fair by a Critical contributor — resolve it before relying on this lens. |
| Domain Modelling | 100% | Exemplary | Strongest area. |
Unscored — 1 check(s) recorded observations but carry no score
- X10 Duplicated predicate — 6 observation(s) recorded · Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score.
Not evidenced — 1 control(s) we could not find positive evidence for
- P5 DR & Backup — not evidenced — repo shows no backup/RTO/RPO controls; absence of evidence is not evidence of a working control
Not included — 90 check(s) not relevant to this codebase
- AC1 Text alternatives — No web markup found — accessibility is not applicable to this repository.
- AC2 Forms & labels — No web markup found — accessibility is not applicable to this repository.
- AC3 Page structure — No web markup found — accessibility is not applicable to this repository.
- AC4 Keyboard semantics — No web markup found — accessibility is not applicable to this repository.
- AC5 ARIA correctness — No web markup found — accessibility is not applicable to this repository.
- AC6 Visual & motion safety — No web markup found — accessibility is not applicable to this repository.
- AC7 A11y enforcement — No web markup found — accessibility is not applicable to this repository.
- AX1 Captive dependencies — Not applicable: the BEAM has no dependency-injection container — state lives in processes, and no process is handed an instance whose lifetime another one scopes.
- AX2 Stateful singletons — Not applicable: Elixir processes share no mutable memory — state lives in a process's own mailbox — so there is no shared object to race on.
- 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
- AX9 CQS / query purity — no CQRS query handlers detected — query purity is not applicable to this codebase
- AXB1 Runtime evidence locked — no reproducible boot — This repository has nothing the runtime tiers could boot or serve — no markup, no UI framework or web-server dependency, no UI component source, no native UI project and no API definition — nothing here is a surface to boot — so runtime a11y/egress/header evidence has no subject here. Not applicable: this is neither a gap in the scan nor a finding about your code.
- AXB2 Runtime readiness — Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score, so there is nothing missing here.
- C1 Data Protection — No personal data detected in a persisted data model — no PII-named field (email, first_name, date_of_birth, phone, …) or stored credential in an Ecto schema, an Ecto migration or an Ash resource — and no database or data-store client (an Ecto repo, Postgrex, MyXQL, Exqlite, Mongo, Mnesia, …) in the source either, so this repository keeps no data at rest for these controls to protect.
- C2 Access Controls — No access-control surface detected in the analyzed source — this repository starts no server another machine can reach (no Phoenix.Endpoint, Plug.Cowboy or Bandit child). Access control is therefore N/A here — a library or OTP application is authorized by the application that serves it, not by itself. If this codebase grows request handlers, the dimension reactivates and a default-deny posture is expected then.
- C3 Audit Trail — No personal data detected in a persisted data model — no PII-named field (email, first_name, date_of_birth, phone, …) or stored credential in an Ecto schema, an Ecto migration or an Ash resource — and no database or data-store client (Ecto, Postgrex, MyXQL, Mongo, EventStore, …) in the source either, so this repository keeps no sensitive data whose changes an audit trail would record. If it does (through a store configured outside this repository, for instance), the trail belongs to wherever that data is stored.
- C4 Data Retention — No personal data detected in a persisted data model — no PII-named field (email, first_name, date_of_birth, phone, …) or stored credential in an Ecto schema, an Ecto migration or an Ash resource — and no database or data-store client (an Ecto repo, Postgrex, MyXQL, Exqlite, Mongo, Mnesia, …) in the source either, so this repository keeps no personal data whose lifetime a retention limit would bound.
- C5 Data-Subject Rights — No personal data detected in a persisted data model — no PII-named field (email, first_name, date_of_birth, phone, …) or stored credential in an Ecto schema, an Ecto migration or an Ash resource — and no database or data-store client (an Ecto repo, Postgrex, MyXQL, Exqlite, Mongo, Mnesia, …) in the source either, so this repository keeps no personal data for a data subject to erase, export or consent over.
- D10 Test Quality — ~28620 lines of test source are present (.exs, .ex) but no test cases reached the test census for this repository — no test root we could resolve declared them, or the files we read declare no cases in a test framework we recognise — so skipped/assertion-free tests couldn't be counted. Not scored — this is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository.
- D11 Test Reliability — Test reliability not included — no .exs test runner
- D14 License Compliance — Package manifest not parsed for licence data — analyzer language-coverage gap
- 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.
- D22 Internal API Consistency — The exposed public-API surface could not be collected — no C#/VB projects loaded.
- D23 Boundary Type-Coupling — No bounded-context organisation was detected either — neither a context-shaped layout, nor 2+ sibling source directories each declaring an aggregate root, nor 2+ projects each declaring an entity of their own. Declaring this codebase's bounded contexts (≥2) would let cross-boundary type coupling be assessed. Declare them in `.codehealth/config.yaml` at the repository root (create it if absent), mapping each context name to the module-path or namespace prefixes that belong to it — e.g. `architecture:` → `contexts:` → `Billing: ["src/billing", "Acme.Billing"]`, `Catalog: ["src/catalog", "Acme.Catalog"]`.
- D24 Comment Value — No inline comments to assess — comment value is not applicable here.
- D25 ADR Conformance — no ADRs to check
- D27 Navigability — D27 counts a call into the standard library or a dependency as unresolved for this repository's language (.ex), so too few call sites counted as resolved to assess navigability. Not scored: this is a gap in the analyzer, not a verdict about this repository.
- D31 IaC & Container Security — No Infrastructure-as-Code or container manifests found (Dockerfile, Docker Compose, Terraform, Kubernetes/Helm, CloudFormation, ARM, Bicep, Ansible); nothing to scan.
- D32 Data Compliance (PII/GDPR) — No personal data was found crossing a boundary the PII/GDPR ruleset checks — nothing written to a log or console sink, placed in a URL or query string, or persisted to browser storage. That is a clean result for the LEAK surface only: this ruleset detects personal data escaping, it does not inventory the personal data a repository holds, so it is not evidence that this repository has no personal-data surface. The personal-data map (Appendix C) and the C1-C5 compliance cards are what speak to that.
- D37 Vulnerability-disclosure Policy — No vulnerability-disclosure policy file found (SECURITY.md/.markdown/.rst/.txt at root or under .github/.forgejo/.gitea/docs, .well-known/security.txt). A coordinated-disclosure policy may live off-repo, so this is not evidenced rather than failed.
- D39 IL Efficiency — D39 measures the IL emitted by a .NET build; this repository has no .NET solution or project files, so the dimension does not apply.
- D40 Network Egress Confinement — No Kubernetes/orchestration workloads found in the repository manifests; network egress policy is a cluster-native control that may live at the platform/firewall layer, so there is nothing to assess here.
- D41 Kernel & Syscall Confinement — No Kubernetes/orchestration workloads found in the repository manifests; seccomp/AppArmor/SELinux confinement is a workload-level control, so there is nothing to assess here.
- D42 Runtime Threat Enforcement — No Kubernetes/orchestration workloads found in the repository manifests; runtime threat-detection and admission-control policy are cluster-level controls, so there is nothing to assess here.
- 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
- D9 Test Distribution — Test source is present (.exs, .ex) but no test cases reached the test census for this repository — no test root we could resolve declared them, or the files we read declare no cases in a test framework we recognise — so its unit/integration/BDD/E2E split couldn't be counted. Not scored — this is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository.
- DM1 Aggregate boundaries — no aggregates detected — aggregate-boundary check not applicable
- DM10 One transaction, one aggregate — no repository writes detected — no operation to judge against the one-aggregate rule
- DM11 Constructible invalid state — no entities detected — construction-time invariants not assessable
- DM2 Strongly-typed ids — no id-bearing domain types detected — strongly-typed-id adoption not assessable
- DM3 Integration-event coupling — no integration events detected — coupling check not applicable
- DM4 Rich vs anemic model — no data-bearing entities detected — rich-vs-anemic model not assessable
- DM5 Encapsulated state — no domain entities found — DM5 grades how entities protect their state, and this repository declares none
- DM7 Repository granularity — no repository abstraction detected (e.g. uses a document session)
- DM9 Scattered domain decisions — not measured — scattered-decision detection needs expression-level symbol resolution: a comparison operand bound to the member it judges (arm one) and a construction bound to the type it produces (arm two). A Roslyn compilation carries both; arm two alone also runs on any frontend that declares whether a construction is produced or passed, and this target loaded neither
- ED1 Event-Driven — not scored — this repository shows none of the 3 signals this lens looks for
- ED5 Idempotency — no mutating command handlers or message consumers detected — idempotency check not applicable
- ES1 Event Sourcing — applicable but not scored (2 of 3 signals for this style — below the bar we score at): an Elixir event-sourcing framework marker (use Commanded.Aggregate / EventStore); 1 Elixir aggregate(s) emitting domain events (%Event{} from execute/2)
- GD1 Unfinished & placeholder code — no source files were read — this check reads C#, F#, JavaScript/TypeScript, Dart, Ruby and Scala, and none was read for this repository's product. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
- IC1 Incompleteness & stubs — not analysed — these correctness checks read a source model that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
- P12 CI test-gate honesty — Reported, not scored — and nothing was matched here. The coverage check applies to any stack, and the automatic-re-run check to any GitHub-Actions workflow, but the checks for excluded tests, skipped tests and sleep-based synchronisation currently recognise only some ecosystems' test-runner idioms, so on a repository built with another stack the zeros below mean 'not checked', not 'clean'.
- P2 Observability — This repository's Elixir source (13 module(s), 178 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 Elixir source, so there is no service whose uptime a failing dependency could take down
- P8 Schema migrations — 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
- P9 Domain vs controller coverage — no coverage report found on disk — produce a coverage report in a standard format (lcov — `mix test --cover` with `excoveralls` (`mix coveralls.lcov`)) and commit it — a hosted scan measures a clone of the repository, so a report that exists only in a working tree, a CI runner's or your own, never reaches it; the artefact is commonly gitignored, so `git add -f` that one file (or un-ignore its path) and commit it alongside the code it measures, or wire coverage collection into CI, to enable this cross-layer check
- PF1 Benchmark discipline — Not applicable: no benchmark suite was found. This check searched for Benchee jobs (the entries of a `Benchee.run` job map) or Benchfella `bench "…"` blocks under `use Benchfella` in any `.ex`/`.exs` file, or benchee or benchfella in a mix.exs, and for a `*benchmark*` script that this repository's CI runs. Benchmarks are credited as a bonus, so their absence is neither scored nor deducted.
- PF2 Allocation hygiene — Not applicable: Elixir runs on a garbage-collected runtime that gives a program no allocation-control idiom to choose on a hot path — no pools, stack allocation or value types — so allocation awareness is not something this code can be rated on.
- PF3 Async & latency hygiene — Not applicable: Elixir has no async/await function colour, so there is no asynchronous code for a blocking call to stall.
- S1 Web-Security Posture — No web surface: 146 Elixir file(s) were read for weak hashes and ciphers, key material fixed in the source, disabled TLS certificate validation and obsolete TLS versions, and none was found. This repository builds on an HTTP-server library (apps/eventstore_dashboard/lib/event_store_dashboard/components/event_link.ex:9 — `Phoenix.LiveView`) but serves no HTTP of its own: its production source starts no server (no `use Phoenix.Endpoint`, `{Plug.Cowboy, …}`, `{Bandit, …}`, `:cowboy.start_clear` or `:ranch.start_listener`), so it is a library whose server controls belong to the application that serves it — HTTPS enforcement, HSTS, cookie flags and input validation are N/A here, as they are for a C# library. If this codebase starts serving HTTP, the dimension reactivates automatically.
- X1 Async correctness — not analysed — these correctness checks read a source model that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
- X12 Unreachable branch — not analysed — these correctness checks read a source model that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
- X13 Undrained process stream — not analysed — these correctness checks read a source model that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
- X14 Bypassable address classification — 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
- X15 Unvalidated length from an untrusted reader — 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
- X16 Unfloored truncation loop — not analysed — these correctness checks read a source model that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
- X17 Uncapped recursion over a caller-supplied document — not analysed — these correctness checks read a source model that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
- X18 Disposal-pattern 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
- X19 Unrestored process-global state — not analysed — these correctness checks read a source model that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
- X2 Cancellation propagation — 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 asks whether an argument guard reports an EMPTY value as a NULL one, which needs a language that throws a null-specific argument exception — .NET's ArgumentNullException, the JVM's NullPointerException, Dart's ArgumentError.notNull. This repository contains none of those languages: the ones it is written in have a single exception for a bad argument, so there is no pair of exceptions to confuse and nothing here for it to assess. Not a gap in the analyzer and not a finding about your code.
- X21 Side-effecting pattern guard — Not applicable: this check looks for a pattern guard or `case` label that increments, decrements or assigns while the switch is deciding whether it matches, and in this repository's languages none can. An Elixir guard admits only guard-safe expressions — the compiler rejects anything else — and a bound value is never mutated in place. Not a gap in the analyzer and not a finding about your code.
- X22 Contradicted release guard — Not applicable: this check looks for a method whose returned value contradicts the flag its `finally` reads to decide whether to give back a lock it took, and in this repository's languages the body cannot set a flag that its cleanup reads. Elixir does not carry it across: a variable rebound inside `try do` is a new binding its `after` never sees, so the body cannot record a handoff where the cleanup can read it. Not a gap in the analyzer and not a finding about your code.
- X23 Unguarded diagnostic materialisation — 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
- X24 Document value interpolated into markup unescaped — not analysed — these correctness checks read a source model that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
- X25 Inert configuration knob — not analysed — these correctness checks read a source model that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
- X26 Unsynchronised callback handoff — Not applicable: this check looks for a collection written by a callback on one thread while the body waiting on it touches it on another, and in this repository's languages no collection is reachable from two threads at once. Elixir processes share no heap: a value sent to another process arrives as a copy, so no collection is reachable from two processes at once. Not a gap in the analyzer and not a finding about your code.
- X27 Collection changed while being enumerated — not analysed — these correctness checks read a source model that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
- X29 Per-element action decided by a fixed element — not analysed — these correctness checks read a source model that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
- 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 — not analysed — these correctness checks read a source model that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
- X32 Type resolved by simple name across every loaded assembly — This check is about how a .NET program searches the assemblies loaded into its process for a type, and this repository contains no .NET source, so there is nothing here for it to assess. Not a gap in the analyzer and not a finding about your code.
- X4 Structured logging — not analysed — these correctness checks read a source model that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
- X5 Nullable reference types — Not applicable: this check asks whether the null-typed discipline a language offers is switched on, and how much of that the assertion operator takes back, and in this repository's languages there is no such switch and no such operator. Elixir's `nil` is an atom in a dynamically typed language: `@spec`s are checked by an external analysis that has no nullability operator, so there is no null-typed discipline in the language to adopt. Not a gap in the analyzer and not a finding about your code.
- X6 Hand-rolled structured-format parsing — Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score, so there is nothing missing here.
- X7 Silent fallback defaults — 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
- X9 Subsumed condition operand — Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score, so there is nothing missing here.
Appendix A — Findings (grouped)
Critical — 1 finding(s)
- REDACTED
Serious — 28 finding(s)
- TodoComment apps/trogon_commanded/lib/trogon/commanded/type_provider.ex:229
- TodoComment apps/trogon_typeprovider/lib/trogon/type_provider.ex:323
- TodoComment apps/trogon_error/lib/trogon/error.ex:251
- FileTooLong: commanded/aggregate_state_construction.ex apps/trogon_credo/lib/trogon/credo/check/commanded/aggregate_state_construction.ex
- FileTooLong: proto/env.ex apps/trogon_proto/lib/trogon/proto/env.ex
- FileTooLong: warning/forbidden_function_call.ex apps/trogon_credo/lib/trogon/credo/check/warning/forbidden_function_call.ex
- Duplicated block (8 lines × 2) apps/trogon_credo/lib/trogon/credo/check/oban/worker_name.ex:120
- Duplicated block (8 lines × 2) apps/trogon_object_id/lib/trogon/object_id.ex:586
- Duplicated block (8 lines × 2) apps/trogon_ecto/lib/trogon/ecto/enum.ex:245
- REDACTED
- REDACTED
- Duplicated block (11 lines × 2) apps/trogon_credo/lib/trogon/credo/check/commanded/deterministic_command.ex:122
- Duplicated block (11 lines × 2) apps/trogon_commanded/lib/trogon/commanded/type_provider.ex:236
- Duplicated block (9 lines × 2) apps/trogon_credo/lib/trogon/credo/check/warning/forbidden_import.ex:56
- Duplicated block (9 lines × 2) apps/trogon_commanded/lib/trogon/commanded/event_store/jsonb_serializer.ex:40
- Duplicated block (7 lines × 2) apps/trogon_object_id/lib/trogon/object_id.ex:490
- Duplicated block (7 lines × 2) apps/trogon_credo/lib/trogon/credo/check/ecto/multi_run_repo.ex:57
- Duplicated block (5 lines × 2) apps/trogon_commanded/lib/trogon/commanded/consistency_policy/exact_version_policy.ex:56
- Duplicated block (5 lines × 2) apps/trogon_credo/lib/trogon/credo/check/warning/forbidden_import.ex:42
- TooManyFunctions: NamespaceBoundary apps/trogon_credo/lib/trogon/credo/check/design/namespace_boundary.ex:1
- REDACTED
- Duplicated block (10–18 lines × 2) apps/eventstore_dashboard/lib/event_store_dashboard/components/streams_table.ex:86
- Duplicated block (10 lines × 2) apps/trogon_object_id/lib/trogon/object_id.ex:318
- Duplicated block (9 lines × 3) apps/trogon_credo/lib/trogon/credo/check/dispatcher/dispatch_options_keys.ex:83
- Duplicated block (7 lines × 3) apps/trogon_credo/lib/trogon/credo/check/commanded/deterministic_command.ex:123
- Duplicated block (5 lines × 5) apps/trogon_credo/lib/trogon/credo/check/commanded/aggregate_state_construction.ex:244
- Duplicated block (6 lines × 2) apps/trogon_credo/lib/trogon/credo/check/oban/worker_name.ex:109
- Off the main sequence: trogon_proto
Minor — 33 finding(s)
- README/code drift apps/trogon_commanded/README.md:15
- README/code drift apps/trogon_configurable/README.md:15
- README/code drift apps/trogon_dispatcher/README.md:64
- README/code drift apps/trogon_dispatcher/README.md:68
- README/code drift apps/trogon_dispatcher/README.md:69
- README/code drift apps/trogon_dispatcher/README.md:70
- README/code drift apps/trogon_dispatcher/README.md:71
- README/code drift apps/trogon_dispatcher/README.md:72
- README/code drift apps/trogon_dispatcher/README.md:76
- README/code drift apps/trogon_dispatcher/README.md:77
- README/code drift apps/trogon_dispatcher/README.md:78
- README/code drift apps/trogon_dispatcher/README.md:82
- README/code drift apps/trogon_error/README.md:15
- README/code drift apps/trogon_proto/README.md:14
- README/code drift apps/trogon_result/README.md:15
- README/code drift apps/trogon_test/README.md:27
- README/code drift apps/trogon_dispatcher/docs/how-to/observe-with-telemetry.md:41
- Duplicated predicate apps/trogon_commanded/lib/trogon/commanded/value_object.ex:161
- Duplicated predicate apps/trogon_credo/lib/trogon/credo/check/design/app_dependency.ex:93
- Duplicated predicate apps/trogon_credo/lib/trogon/credo/check/design/app_dependency.ex:85
- Duplicated predicate apps/trogon_credo/lib/trogon/credo/check/warning/forbidden_function_call.ex:201
- Duplicated predicate apps/trogon_commanded/lib/trogon/commanded/value_object.ex:210
- Duplicated predicate apps/trogon_credo/lib/trogon/credo/check/dispatcher/context_mutation.ex:150
- Off-boarding risk: anonymized user #1
- Off-boarding risk: anonymized user #2
- Projects may be oversized for their cohesion
- REDACTED
- REDACTED
- REDACTED
- No ADRs
- No src/ separation
- CI build step not evidenced
- No SAST
Appendix B — Reproduction & audit trail
| 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-3e2f099efc82425eb4790699709c38e1/history.json --exit-code 0 --source . | 0 | 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-3e2f099efc82425eb4790699709c38e1/tree.json --exit-code 0 --source . | 0 | artifacts/raw/gitleaks-tree.json |
| D29 · Static Analysis (SAST) | semgrep | — | semgrep --config /opt/semgrep-rules/security-audit.yml --config /opt/semgrep-rules/owasp-top-ten.yml --config /opt/semgrep-rules/watchdog-sast.yml --json --quiet --timeout 10 --timeout-threshold 3 --metrics off . | 1 | artifacts/raw/semgrep.json |
| D30 · Dependency Vulnerabilities | osv-scanner | — | osv-scanner --format json --recursive --experimental-disable-plugins transitivedependency/requirements --experimental-disable-plugins dotnet/csproj --experimental-disable-plugins dotnet/nugetcpm . | 0 | artifacts/raw/osv-scanner.json |
| D31 · IaC & Container Security | trivy | — | trivy: not applicable — No Infrastructure-as-Code or container manifests found (Dockerfile, Docker Compose, Terraform, Kubernetes/Helm, CloudFormation, ARM, Bicep, Ansible); nothing to scan. | 0 | — |
| D32 · Data Compliance (PII/GDPR) | semgrep | — | semgrep: not applicable — No personal data was found crossing a boundary the PII/GDPR ruleset checks — nothing written to a log or console sink, placed in a URL or query string, or persisted to browser storage. That is a clean result for the LEAK surface only: this ruleset detects personal data escaping, it does not inventory the personal data a repository holds, so it is not evidence that this repository has no personal-data surface. The personal-data map (Appendix C) and the C1-C5 compliance cards are what speak to that. | 0 | — |
| D37 · Vulnerability-disclosure Policy | disclosure | — | disclosure: not applicable — No vulnerability-disclosure policy file found (SECURITY.md/.markdown/.rst/.txt at root or under .github/.forgejo/.gitea/docs, .well-known/security.txt). A coordinated-disclosure policy may live off-repo, so this is not evidenced rather than failed. | 0 | — |
| D40 · Network Egress Confinement | runtime-hardening | — | runtime-hardening: not applicable — No Kubernetes/orchestration workloads found in the repository manifests; network egress policy is a cluster-native control that may live at the platform/firewall layer, so there is nothing to assess here. | 0 | — |
| D41 · Kernel & Syscall Confinement | runtime-hardening | — | runtime-hardening: not applicable — No Kubernetes/orchestration workloads found in the repository manifests; seccomp/AppArmor/SELinux confinement is a workload-level control, so there is nothing to assess here. | 0 | — |
| D42 · Runtime Threat Enforcement | runtime-hardening | — | runtime-hardening: not applicable — No Kubernetes/orchestration workloads found in the repository manifests; runtime threat-detection and admission-control policy are cluster-level controls, so there is nothing to assess here. | 0 | — |
| D43 · Malicious Dependencies | osv-scanner | — | osv-scanner --format json --recursive --experimental-disable-plugins transitivedependency/requirements --experimental-disable-plugins dotnet/csproj --experimental-disable-plugins dotnet/nugetcpm . | 0 | artifacts/raw/osv-scanner.json |