Public report of symfony/cache, published 20 October 2026. It has the same score, grades and number of
findings as the full report. The details of security findings (where they are in the code, which known
vulnerabilities and which passwords or keys were found) are left out, so nobody can use them against the project.
Public
Executive reportMeasured under the Code Assurance Index, an open standard for code quality, using its published scoring rules (rubric version 2026.10.5). Watchdog signed this survey and filed it in the standard's public register, where anyone can look it up by its survey ID. Check this survey →
Signed and filed in the standard's public register, 20 October 2026, 22:52 UTC · Survey ID cd_a08eabaee22b41adb6b2af5cbeae5df2
symfony/cache
Measured 20 October 2026, 22:49 UTC, at code version 1d70b55
CAI scoreAdequate
CriticalWeakAdequateStrongExemplary
Down 5 since the last survey
The score is built from these lenses. Each lens grades one area of the code, such as how easy it is to change or how well it is protected. The weakest lens counts most, so one weak area pulls the score down instead of being averaged away.
A small codebase: 15,634 lines of product code in 1 project, tests not counted · Estimated rebuild effort: about 0.2 person-years · Weakest lens: Maturity, 41
Findings by how serious they are
0 critical125 serious36 minor
23 dimensions are left out of the score. For each one, Watchdog either couldn't measure it in this code, or found no evidence of the safeguard it looks for, such as a tested backup restore. They count neither for nor against the score, and Limitations lists each one with its reason.
This survey was produced by
Watchdog
Producer
Canine Development
Analyzer
Watchdog engine 1.0.0
Measured
20 October 2026, 22:49 UTC
A measurement, not a certificate. The Code Assurance Index records a number
together with the evidence it was worked out from, so anyone can recalculate it, but it doesn't certify or guarantee
the code. The standard was written by Canine Development, which also builds Watchdog. It is open to any tool that
implements it, and today Watchdog is the only one that does.
The score is deterministic, which means the same code always gets the same score. Watchdog works it out with tools that follow published rules, and an AI model never decides it, so anyone who applies the same rules to the same code gets the same number. How it is done is explained under Methodology ▸
41of 45 dimensions measured by tools. The other 4 are advisory notes from an AI model, which explain the code but don't count towards the score.
151of 161 findings point to an exact file and line, so you can open each one in the code. The other 10 concern the repository as a whole, such as missing documentation.
45dimensions across 5 lenses, read from 15,634 lines of product code in 1 project.
symfony/cache scores 51 out of 100 and is rated Adequate, while three of its five lenses score higher still: Security and Compliance at 100, rated Exemplary, Architecture at 85, rated Strong, and Code Health at 57, rated Adequate.
The score is lower than those three because the weakest lens counts most, and here that is Maturity, which scores 41 and is rated Weak. Its Architecture documentation dimension scores 0 out of 10, and until that reaches 4, Maturity can't be rated higher than Adequate. The first actions are to resolve the 3 Documentation finding(s) in Documentation Quality and to record your significant design decisions, and if Maturity rose to 70, the score would rise from 51 to about 58.
No finding in this survey is critical.
Watchdog couldn't measure 21 dimensions in this code, among them Code Coverage, Test Reliability and Dependency Hygiene, so they are left out of the score. The product code is 15,634 lines, which would take an estimated 0.2 person-years, around €23,000, to rebuild.
A lens is capped at Adequate while one of its dimensions scores below 4 out of 10, however well the rest of the lens does. That way a serious problem in one place always shows in the lens's rating.
How the score is built: what each lens counts forThe lenses don't count equally. The weakest lens counts most, the next weakest a little less, and so on, so a weak area pulls the score down instead of being averaged away. In the bar below, each part's width shows how much that lens counts and its colour shows its rating. Improving the widest part moves the score most, and as that lens improves, it counts for less, because another lens becomes the weakest.
Watchdog compares every finding with the previous survey's. A finding that has only moved to another line in the same file counts as the same finding, so only new findings appear here. Advisory notes from the AI model are left out, because the model words them afresh in every survey.
Rebuild cost: about €23,000 · Estimate
Cost to rebuild
€7,500 to €38,000, for 126 to 399 hours of work, about 0.2 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
×0.7 at a score of 51. Better code takes more work to write, so the factor is ×1.0 at a score of 70, lower below it and higher above it.
Size
Small: 15,634 lines of product code
How the estimate is made: Watchdog prices the hours a team would need to write this code again, at €60 to €95 an hour. Declarations and boilerplate are priced at a fast rate and logic at a slower one, and the logic is then multiplied by the difficulty of the problem and by the quality factor. The estimate can be about 30% off either way, and it moves most with the hourly rate and the difficulty. For this code, every line is priced as straight logic, which keeps the estimate on the low side.
Top priorities
The three actions that raise the score most for the work they take. The full ranked list is in the Roadmap.
1
Resolve the 3 Documentation finding(s) in Documentation Quality — start with README.md (3).
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.
Each conclusion below combines several dimensions into one point that no single dimension shows, and lists the measurements it rests on.
Where the investment is most exposed · Value at risk
This code would cost about €23,000 to build again, about 0.2 person-years of work. Its weakest lens is Maturity, at 41 (Weak). Maturity is about how well the project explains and looks after itself, which decides whether a new developer, or a new supplier, can take over. Because the weakest lens counts most in the score, work on Maturity also moves the score most.
Based on: the rebuild estimate · the Maturity grade · how much each lens counts
What to do: Start with the Maturity actions in Top priorities.
If you do one thing first · First action
Resolve the 3 Documentation finding(s) in Documentation Quality. Of all the actions in this report, it raises the score most for the work it takes: about 6 points for low effort, because it clears the 3 Documentation Quality findings. The next survey will show the change in the score.
Based on: the ranked actions in Top priorities, by score gain and effort
What hard-to-read code costs each year · Cost
Four dimensions measure how easy the code is to work in: two measure how tangled its logic is, one how much of it is copied, and one how well each part sticks to a single job. In this codebase they average 7.4 out of 10. Code at that level is slower to change than clean code, and Watchdog estimates the extra work at 2% to 5% on every change. The history of the code shows how much it changes: about 10,534 lines over the last 90 days, which is about 42,721 lines a year. At that pace, the extra work comes to an estimated 2.1 to 14.2 engineer-days a year, and it grows as more code changes.
How this is estimated: The number of changed lines is measured from the history of the code. The rest rests on two assumptions of Watchdog's own: code scoring 8 out of 10 or more adds no extra work, and each point below 8 adds 2.5% to 5.6% to every change; and an engineer changes 150 to 400 lines in a day. The result is a range for planning, not a measurement.
Based on: Cyclomatic Complexity · Cognitive Complexity · Code Duplication · Cohesion (LCOM4) · the code's change history
What to do: Start with the files listed under Churn × Complexity Hotspots, which change often and are hard to read, because that is where the extra work is paid most often.
Architecture: which parts of the code depend on which
The code is divided into modules, groups of code that each handle one part of the product, and a module depends on another when it uses code from it. The table lists the modules both down the side and across the top, in an order where each module should only use modules listed above it. A number in a cell means the module on that row uses the module in that column, and it counts the pairs of building blocks (types) that connect them. The one thing to look for is a mark above the diagonal line. It means two or more modules use each other in a loop (a dependency cycle), so none of them can be changed, tested or released on its own.
9 modules, with 9 dependencies between them. Every module uses only modules listed above it, so there are no loops.
Which modules use which. The module on each row uses the module in each column, and the number counts the pairs of types that connect them. A cell above the diagonal is part of a loop.
32 pairs of types, where a type in Cache.Adapter uses a type in Cache. Showing 25 of them; the rest are in namespace-graph.json in this report's bundle.
Cache.Adapter uses Cache.Marshaller, so a change to Cache.Marshaller can break Cache.Adapter, while a change to Cache.Adapter can't break Cache.Marshaller.
Position
Below the diagonal: Cache.Adapter uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
Cache.CacheWarmer uses Cache.Adapter, so a change to Cache.Adapter can break Cache.CacheWarmer, while a change to Cache.CacheWarmer can't break Cache.Adapter.
Position
Below the diagonal: Cache.CacheWarmer uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
Cache.DataCollector uses Cache.Adapter, so a change to Cache.Adapter can break Cache.DataCollector, while a change to Cache.DataCollector can't break Cache.Adapter.
Position
Below the diagonal: Cache.DataCollector uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
Cache.Messenger uses Cache.Adapter, so a change to Cache.Adapter can break Cache.Messenger, while a change to Cache.Messenger can't break Cache.Adapter.
Position
Below the diagonal: Cache.Messenger uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
Cache.Traits uses Cache.Marshaller, so a change to Cache.Marshaller can break Cache.Traits, while a change to Cache.Traits can't break Cache.Marshaller.
Position
Below the diagonal: Cache.Traits uses a module listed above it, which is the healthy direction.
Begin by documenting significant design decisions in a dedicated folder and resolving existing documentation quality issues, starting with the README. Expand the README to include getting-started instructions, an architecture overview, and a project map to improve onboarding. Implement a CI workflow to automatically build and run tests on every push or pull request. Finally, enforce strict nullable reference type checking by raising the static analysis level and systematically resolving the resulting nullness errors.
Ranked by impact ÷ effort. "Helps" is the estimated gain on the 0–100 health score.
Do this
Helps
Effort
Dimension
Resolve the 3 Documentation finding(s) in Documentation Quality — start with README.md (3).
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.
Raise PHPStan to level 8 (`level: 8` in `phpstan.neon.dist`, or `max`) or Psalm to `errorLevel="3"` or stricter, so `?Type` is a type the checker holds you to; generate a baseline for what that surfaces only to pay it down, not to keep it. Then resolve the baselined nullness errors rather than adding to them: each is a call on a value the checker showed could be null — narrow it (`if ($x === null) { … }`, `?->`, an early return), make the property non-nullable and initialise it in the constructor, or change the return type so the null cannot arrive.
Every finding carries one of four grades. Three say how serious it is. The fourth says this
survey could not settle it — and it is a grade, not a gap.
Critical — 0
A definite problem that already costs you something and drags the score down: a
missing authorisation check, a dependency with a known exploit, a build that does not reproduce. Failure here
tends to cause failures elsewhere.
Serious — 125
Likely wrong, but not failing yet. It degrades
the codebase over a longer horizon and can cause failures elsewhere — not urgent this week, not something to
carry for two years either.
Minor — 36
Recorded, with no effect on how the codebase functions.
Present so the survey is complete, not because it needs doing.
Could not be resolved — 23
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. 41 of 45 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 0.9 — the weighted average across measured dimensions; it falls as more of the score leans on LLM-assisted judgement and rises when it's fully tool-backed.
Every figure here is one of three kinds, and we label which: ✓ Measured — a deterministic fact (LoC, complexity, coverage); ~ Modeled — an estimate from a stated model (cost, effort, value-at-risk), always a range with its assumptions, never a precise fact; ◐ Advisory — an LLM prose judgement. We never present a modelled estimate as if it were measured. Perfect or absent scores carry their provenance too (ADR-0011): ✓ Tool-verified means the property itself was measured across the surface; ○ Nothing flagged means the probes came back clean — a claim bounded by what a repository can show; ⊘ Not evidenced means a working control (a tested restore, an automated rollback) showed no positive evidence — absence of evidence is not evidence of a control, so it's excluded from the score rather than awarded a spurious 10; ◐ Sampled · advisory marks an LLM verdict over a bounded sample — advisory, never a deterministic measurement.
What we checked — 45 dimensions across the health lenses
Each chip is a dimension scored from real signals across architecture, testing, dependencies, security & compliance, documentation, git-history and code quality — in one coherent pass. A surface report typically covers a handful.
How to trust any code-health report — three questions
Can you open the finding? Real findings cite a repo-relative file and line you can open at the cited line — never an absolute scratch path. Here, 151 of 161 do; the remainder are repo-wide signals — a dimension-level measurement, not a single line. (Every path in this report is repo-relative by construction: paths are normalized at the producer and the report is rejected if any rooted path leaks through.)
Is there a tool behind the number? Every score below names the method that produced it — Roslyn, git, a scanner, or (for a handful of documentation/naming dimensions) an LLM labelled sampled · advisory — not a narrative.
Does re-running give the same result? Run it again on the same commit and the score — and this report, byte for byte — is identical. A report whose numbers move between runs is describing the run, not the code.
This report answers yes to all three. That's the bar to hold any assessment to.
Tools & methods
The actual versions used this run (captured at analysis time) — re-run on the same commit for the identical score.
Method
Backs
Version
Evaluator
Roslyn static analysis
Complexity, cohesion, coupling, dead code, API surface, layering
What ran differently this time — a tool absent, degraded, or that fell back to an estimate. Named openly, not folded silently into the scores. A degraded run also records its exact cause in diagnostics.md.
D8 Code Coverage — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. Coverage NOT MEASURED: test source is present (.php) 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 (Clover XML — with Xdebug (`XDEBUG_MODE=coverage`) or PCOV installed, `vendor/bin/phpunit --coverage-clover coverage.xml`) and commit it — a hosted scan measures a clone of the repository, so a report that exists only in a working tree, a CI runner's or your own, never reaches it; the artefact is commonly gitignored, so `git add -f` that one file (or un-ignore its path) and commit it alongside the code it measures. You can widen what we reach: optional: produce a coverage report in a standard format (Clover XML — with Xdebug (`XDEBUG_MODE=coverage`) or PCOV installed, `vendor/bin/phpunit --coverage-clover coverage.xml`) and commit it — a hosted scan measures a clone of the repository, so a report that exists only in a working tree, a CI runner's or your own, never reaches it; the artefact is commonly gitignored, so `git add -f` that one file (or un-ignore its path) and commit it alongside the code it measures — then the real number is read on the next scan.
D11 Test Reliability — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. Test source is present (.php) but the built-in reliability runner does not support this repository's ecosystem, so flakiness couldn't be assessed. Not scored — this is a gap in the analyzer's language coverage, not a finding about this repository.
D12 Dependency Hygiene — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. Not scored — 5 direct Composer requirement(s) were read, but the outdated signal needs Packagist, and no committed composer.lock resolves them to releases, so this dimension's own question is only partly answered. NOT a finding that these dependencies are current or healthy.
D14 License Compliance — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. Not scored — this repository declares a composer.json but commits no composer.lock this pass can read, so the set of packages it installs is not on disk: its composer.json states version CONSTRAINTS, and Composer's guidance is that a library leaves the lock uncommitted. Producing the graph needs Composer's solver, which this pass does not run, and grading whichever release happens to be newest today would be a verdict about a dependency graph nobody resolved. NOT a finding that this repository's licences are compliant: this dimension asserts nothing about its licensing in either direction.
D27 Navigability — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. Navigability is taken over call sites whose callee resolved. For C# that population includes calls into referenced assemblies; for this language only calls declared inside the repository count, so the abstention threshold reads the repository's use of its standard library as a resolution failure. That is a limit of this analyzer, not a build problem in this repository.
D32 Data Compliance (PII/GDPR) — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. `Adapter/AbstractAdapter.php`, `Adapter/AbstractTagAwareAdapter.php`, `Adapter/DoctrineDbalAdapter.php`, `Adapter/TraceableAdapter.php`, `CacheBundle.php`, … (+5 more) produced a parse error, so every rule in this engine's `gdpr.yml` was absent there. That absence is NOT a clean result: these rules detect personal data crossing a boundary into a log sink, a URL or browser storage, and a file that was never parsed cannot report any of the three. The rest of the tree analysed normally and its rows above stand; only these files are unaccounted for. You can widen what we reach: fix the syntax error (or exclude the file deliberately) and re-scan to cover it.
AX1 Captive dependencies — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check reads Microsoft.Extensions.DependencyInjection registrations in C# and Spring beans in Java/Kotlin only, and this repository's container is Symfony DependencyInjection, whose lifetimes are not modelled yet, so it had nothing of this repository's product to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
AX6 Interface segregation — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check is computed over the public interfaces this run's compilations declare, and none was loaded, so it had nothing to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
C1 Data Protection — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. 'PDO' is imported (Traits/PdoTrait.php:82), but no entity, schema, table or model declaration this check reads was found beside it, so whether personal data is stored could not be decided.
C3 Audit Trail — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. 'PDO' is imported (Traits/PdoTrait.php:82), but no entity, schema, table or model declaration this check reads was found beside it, so whether personal data is stored could not be decided.
C4 Data Retention — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. 'PDO' is imported (Traits/PdoTrait.php:82), but no entity, schema, table or model declaration this check reads was found beside it, so whether personal data is stored could not be decided.
C5 Data-Subject Rights — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. 'PDO' is imported (Traits/PdoTrait.php:82), but no entity, schema, table or model declaration this check reads was found beside it, so whether personal data is stored could not be decided.
GD1 Unfinished & placeholder code — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check reads C# syntax, F#, JavaScript/TypeScript, Dart, Ruby and Scala source only, and no C#, F#, JavaScript/TypeScript, Dart, Ruby or Scala was found, and this repository's PHP is not read yet, so it had nothing of this repository's product to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
IC1 Incompleteness & stubs — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check reads C# syntax, JavaScript/TypeScript, Java, Dart, Ruby and Scala source only, and no C#, JavaScript/TypeScript, Java, Dart, Ruby or Scala was found, and this repository's PHP is not read yet, so it had nothing of this repository's product to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
S1 Web-Security Posture — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. These web-security controls are read from declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names and guard methods in a C# source model, and none was loaded on this run, so there was nothing to gather. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository lacks web-security controls.
X1 Async correctness — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check reads C# syntax, and JavaScript/TypeScript, Python, Dart, Ruby, Scala, Rust and Kotlin source only, and no C# was loaded and no JavaScript/TypeScript, Python, Dart, Ruby, Scala, Rust or Kotlin was found in this repository, so it had nothing of this repository's product to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X12 Unreachable branch — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check reads C# syntax, and JavaScript/TypeScript, Python, Dart, Ruby, Scala and Kotlin source only, and no C# was loaded and no JavaScript/TypeScript, Python, Dart, Ruby, Scala or Kotlin was found in this repository, so it had nothing of this repository's product to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X13 Undrained process stream — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check reads C# syntax, and JavaScript/TypeScript, Python, Dart, Ruby, Scala and Kotlin source only, and no C# was loaded and no JavaScript/TypeScript, Python, Dart, Ruby, Scala or Kotlin was found in this repository, so it had nothing of this repository's product to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X17 Uncapped recursion over a caller-supplied document — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check reads C# syntax, and JavaScript/TypeScript, Python, Dart, Ruby, Scala and Kotlin source only, and no C# was loaded and no JavaScript/TypeScript, Python, Dart, Ruby, Scala or Kotlin was found in this repository, so it had nothing of this repository's product to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X24 Document value interpolated into markup unescaped — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check reads C# syntax, and JavaScript/TypeScript, Java, Scala, Ruby and Python source only, and no C# was loaded and no JavaScript/TypeScript, Java, Scala, Ruby or Python was found in this repository, so it had nothing of this repository's product to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X27 Collection changed while being enumerated — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check reads C# syntax, and Java, Rust, Erlang, F#, Python, Dart, Ruby, Scala and Kotlin source only, and no C# was loaded, no Java, Rust, Erlang, F#, Python, Dart, Ruby, Scala or Kotlin was found, and this repository's PHP is not read yet, so it had nothing of this repository's product to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
X29 Per-element action decided by a fixed element — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check reads C# syntax, and JavaScript/TypeScript, Java, Rust, Dart, Ruby, Scala and Kotlin source only, and no C# was loaded and no JavaScript/TypeScript, Java, Rust, Dart, Ruby, Scala or Kotlin was found in this repository, so it had nothing of this repository's product to read. That is a gap in this analyzer's language reach — not a finding that the repository is free of what this check looks for.
Repo exclusion declarations (.gitattributes linguist-generated/vendored, .editorconfig generated_code): none declared — every source file was scored.
Limitations & what we did not check
Watchdog assesses the repository exactly as committed, and only the repository. By design it does not reach outside the source tree: the live cloud account, the running CI/CD pipeline, the host's branch-protection and approval rules, the production configuration, or a restore actually exercised against a backup are all out of scope. That boundary is a feature, not a gap — a repo-relative, deterministic scan re-runs identically on any commit and every finding opens at a real file and line, where a live audit can neither be reproduced nor traced. The visible consequence is that controls which leave no in-repo evidence are reported as "not evidenced" and excluded from the score rather than awarded a number a static scan cannot justify.
Per-dimension blind spots
For each dimension that was measured, what a static, repo-only scan structurally cannot see — the honest edge of the measurement, not a failure of it.
D1 Cyclomatic Complexity: Cyclomatic complexity counts branches statically — it cannot tell an essential decision tree from accidental tangle, nor see complexity that lives in data or configuration (large switch-case token tables, DSL lexers/parsers, data-as-code rule tables) rather than control flow: a tokenizer's many single-character cases read as high complexity though each branch is trivial.
D2 Cognitive Complexity: Cognitive-complexity heuristics approximate how hard code is to follow; genuine domain difficulty and well-named intent that eases reading are not captured.
D3 God Classes: "God class" is sized by members and responsibilities visible in the type — a deliberately broad facade over a coherent subsystem can read the same as an accidental grab-bag. For front-end JS the file-length check is cohesion-aware (a single-responsibility module — one class/IIFE — earns a 3× threshold), but cohesion is approximated from top-level declarations, not true dependency structure.
D4 Code Duplication: Duplication is token-similarity — an in-process token-stream comparison over sliding windows, with type-aware normalization — so it finds copy-paste, not semantic duplication expressed differently. Committed machine-written code (scaffolded migrations, designer/codegen output, protobuf/OpenAPI stubs, model snapshots) is EXCLUDED — its repetition is the tool's, not the team's — so the score reflects hand-written duplication only.
D6 Cohesion (LCOM4): LCOM4 cohesion is syntactic — it infers connectivity from which methods touch which fields/methods by name, not from real runtime behaviour or intent.
D9 Test Distribution: The test-pyramid shape is inferred from project/folder naming and references, with a single test host bucketed per-file by its path tier and content signals — a suite that names tiers unconventionally and gives no per-file signal can still be mis-bucketed.
D10 Test Quality: Assertion density is structural — it cannot tell a meaningful behavioural assertion from a trivial one, only that an assertion is present.
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.
D22 Internal API Consistency: API-surface coherence is an LLM judgement over a sample of the public surface — consistency of intent across the whole API is approximated, not exhaustively verified.
D26 Project Cohesion: Project focus is sized from members/namespaces per project — a project that is broad by deliberate design reads the same as one that has sprawled.
D28 Secrets (history): Secret-history scanning sweeps the git log for known patterns — a secret that predates the available history, or never matched a signature, is not found (clean means "nothing matched in the history we can see").
D29 Static Analysis (SAST): SAST findings are pattern-based (semgrep) — it finds classes of bug it has rules for; logic flaws, auth/authorization gaps and issues needing runtime context are out of reach (and clean means "no rule matched").
D34 Knowledge Freshness: Freshness is decayed commit RECENCY, not comprehension — code read often but rarely committed reads as orphaned, and stable code that genuinely needs no changes is penalised the same as forgotten code; bot/squash commits distort it like the bus factor.
D35 Change Coupling: Change coupling is co-change in COMMITS — files split across separate commits, or coupled only through a shared config/build step, read as uncoupled, and a sweeping commit (rename/format) is excluded so it doesn't couple everything. It shows that files change together, not WHY: a high coupling can be a healthy cohesive pair as readily as a hidden leak.
D44 Platform End-of-Life: The support table is FROZEN, so it goes out of date by losing RECALL: a release that ended support after the table was written is missed until the table is refreshed, and this dimension reading 10 is not evidence that a platform is current. Only platforms the repository DECLARES in a place this pass reads are seen — a runtime named only in a Dockerfile (D31's subject), in a CI workflow (D29's), or in a file this pass does not parse (go.mod, a Gemfile ruby directive) is invisible here, which is why a repository declaring none of them abstains rather than scoring. Only frameworks with a PUBLISHED support policy are tracked: React, Flask and Express publish none, so their age cannot be judged and their absence from a report is not a statement that they are supported.
AX10 Code composition: Role is inferred from namespace/folder convention, not semantics — a domain concept living in a folder named "Services" reads as application, and the split is lines-of-code, not business value. The business-logic-share score is a SOFT, FLOORED signal: it contributes to the Architecture lens but is floored at the Critical gate, so an infrastructure-heavy design (a gateway, an ETL, a driver) is legitimately low without being nuked to zero.
M4 Documentation accuracy: Onboarding quality is an LLM read of the docs/setup present — it cannot run the onboarding or measure how long a real new joiner takes; the verdict is sampled and advisory.
P6 Release Hygiene: Rollback/observability controls are inferred from repo artefacts (pipelines, dashboards-as-code) — controls configured in external tooling, with no in-repo trace, cannot be credited.
The LLM boundary
LLM-set scores this run (4): D19, D21, D22, M4 (model: Local LLM). For these, a model reads a bounded sample and sets the numeric score; each names its own sample and method on its card. They are sampled and advisory by design: they vary at the margins between runs and are never a deterministic measurement. Every other score in this report is tool-computed at confidence 1.0.
What it measures: How tangled the control flow is — methods with many branches are hard to test and change.
Method: Cyclomatic complexity per method (1 + decision points), computed exhaustively across production source; test projects separated by convention. Deterministic.
+ 22 more group(s) — more in Appendix A; the complete list is findings.md.
What to do
Bring the 1 body over 60 down to 60 or less in Cyclomatic Complexity — start with RedisTrait.createConnection (cyclomatic 150). — Refactoring it lifts Cyclomatic Complexity from 5.6 to about 6.5/10.
Stand up a CI pipeline, then gate Cyclomatic Complexity in it to reach Verified (currently Documented). — This repository has no CI pipeline, so there is nothing to add a gate to yet — the pipeline comes first. Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Prevented — provenance only; does not change the score.
Detailed fixes: d1_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.
What it measures: How hard the code is for a person to follow, beyond raw branching.
Method: Cognitive complexity per method (Sonar-style nesting-penalized score), computed exhaustively over production code, excluding test projects. Deterministic.
+ 37 more group(s) — more in Appendix A; the complete list is findings.md.
What to do
Bring the 2 bodies over 120 down to 120 or less in Cognitive Complexity — start with RedisTrait.createConnection (cognitive 228), CachePoolPass.process (cognitive 131). — This score is capped by its worst body, so a finding fixed alone moves it by almost nothing — the next one down takes its place. Refactoring these 2 together lifts Cognitive Complexity from 4.6 to about 5.4/10, projected with the scoring formula itself and assuming each lands exactly at 120; a cleaner split scores higher.
Stand up a CI pipeline, then gate Cognitive Complexity in it to reach Verified (currently Documented). — This repository has no CI pipeline, so there is nothing to add a gate to yet — the pipeline comes first. Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Prevented — provenance only; does not change the score.
Detailed fixes: d2_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.
Do you agree with this assessment?
D3 · God Classes8.3 / 10Strong✓ Tool-verified
What it measures: Over-large classes that try to do too much ("god classes").
Method: God-class detection by line and method-count thresholds per logical type (partial classes unified), filtered for generated code and registration/contract false positives. Deterministic.
Resolve the 4 TooManyMethods finding(s) in God Classes — start with RelayProxy.php, RedisProxy.php, RelayClusterProxy.php. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (4 warning-level).
Resolve the 4 ClassTooLong finding(s) in God Classes — start with RelayProxy.php, RedisProxy.php, RelayClusterProxy.php. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (4 warning-level).
Resolve the 4 FileTooLong finding(s) in God Classes — start with RelayProxy.php, RedisTrait.php, RelayClusterProxy.php. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (4 warning-level).
Stand up a CI pipeline, then gate God Classes in it to reach Verified (currently Documented). — This repository has no CI pipeline, so there is nothing to add a gate to yet — the pipeline comes first. Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Prevented — provenance only; does not change the score.
Detailed fixes: d3_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.
What it measures: Copy-pasted code that should be shared instead.
Method: Code duplication via token-stream sliding windows with type-aware normalization (locals masked, type names preserved), density-scored per KLoC of production code. Deterministic.
27 duplicated block group(s) detected. A further 2 rows report members as variants of one another; they aggregate block groups already counted above and are not themselves counted.
+ 15 more group(s) — more in Appendix A; the complete list is findings.md.
What to do
Resolve the 4 Duplicated block (14 lines × 2) finding(s) in Code Duplication — start with AbstractAdapter.php, AbstractTagAwareAdapter.php, PhpArrayAdapter.php. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (4 warning-level).
Resolve the 3 Duplicated block (8 lines × 2) finding(s) in Code Duplication — start with DoctrineDbalAdapter.php, MemcachedAdapter.php, RedisTrait.php. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (3 warning-level).
Resolve the 2 Duplicated block (9 lines × 2) finding(s) in Code Duplication — start with RedisTagAwareAdapter.php, TraceableAdapter.php. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (2 warning-level).
Stand up a CI pipeline, then gate Code Duplication in it to reach Verified (currently Documented). — This repository has no CI pipeline, so there is nothing to add a gate to yet — the pipeline comes first. Hardens enforcement from Documented toward Verified — provenance only; does not change the score.
Detailed fixes: d4_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.
What it measures: Whether a class's methods are focused on a single responsibility.
Method: LCOM4 cohesion per production class with at least two methods: connected components of methods sharing state or calls, computed syntactically. Deterministic, not a proxy.
Coverage: Exhaustive · type-level: LCOM4 cohesion computed over every production class — the population is all types, not a name convention.
D9 · Test Distribution10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified
What it measures: Whether the test suite has a healthy mix of unit / integration / end-to-end tests.
Method: Test projects classified (Unit/Integration/BDD/E2E) from compiled metadata; test methods counted exhaustively across projects with placement-agnostic disk fallback. Deterministic.
161 test methods: 161 unit, 0 integration, 0 BDD, 0 e2e.
✓ On the Gold path — maintain.
Detailed fixes: d9_recommendation.md.
Do you agree with this assessment?
D10 · Test Quality10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified
What it measures: Whether the tests truly assert behaviour rather than just running the code.
Method: Per-test assertions, skips, and mock references analyzed via Roslyn; structured skip-reason tags (BUG:/ENV:) separate documented deferrals from debt. Deterministic.
15 skipped (15 with a documented reason), 1 zero-assertion, no mocking-framework packages referenced (hand-written doubles or no mocking) across 161 tests.
What it measures: Whether any secrets (keys, tokens, passwords) have leaked into the code.
Method: In-process native secret scanner (entropy plus signature patterns) across all tracked files; no external tool. A clean result is a measured 10, not no-data zero. Deterministic.
What it measures: Files that change often and are also complex — the riskiest hotspots.
Method: Per production file churn times cyclomatic complexity over a rolling window, computed from git and Roslyn/JS/Razor analysis. Exhaustive, deterministic per commit date.
Resolve the 3 Hotspot finding(s) in Churn × Complexity Hotspots — start with RedisTrait.php, LockRegistry.php, CachePoolPass.php. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (3 warning-level).
Detailed fixes: d15_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.
Do you agree with this assessment?
D16 · Bus Factor7.4 / 10Strong✓ Tool-verified
What it measures: Whether knowledge is concentrated in too few people (the "bus factor").
Method: Living knowledge per author via time-decayed commit attribution (6-month half-life, focus weighting) across largest source files. Deterministic, avoids blame's mechanical-refactor false positives.
13 source file(s) have their living knowledge concentrated in one author (≥90% of recent, decayed contribution). The largest is Traits/RedisProxy.php. Counted over 51 of the 92 production source files in this repository: the rest are under the ~2,400-byte size floor this dimension measures over.
Off-boarding risk: anonymized user #1
Further sole-owners (lower concentration)
What to do
Resolve the 1 Off-boarding risk finding(s) in Bus Factor. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 recommendation-level).
Resolve the 1 Further sole-owners (lower concentration) finding(s) in Bus Factor. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 recommendation-level).
Detailed fixes: d16_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.
What it measures: Acknowledged debt left in the code — TODOs, dead code, suppressed warnings.
Method: Roslyn syntactic debt markers (suppressions/TODO/FIXME/HACK/empty-catch/commented-code/Obsolete) plus SymbolFinder dead-code analysis; weighted-debt-per-KLoC density deducted 2.0x per unit. Deterministic, exhaustive.
0 deducted task-comment markers across 15634 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 it measures: Whether the project's documentation is clear, complete, and useful.
Method: Judged by language model at low temperature (0.0-0.1) on a deterministic doc sample (READMEs plus first 25 architecture docs), with two-pass stability filtering. Advisory, sampled.
The single README is a one-paragraph overview of the repository's purpose (a PSR-6 caching component with PSR-16 adapter and contracts support) plus sponsorship links, resources to docs/contributing/bugs, and a backer link. It states what the project does but gives no installation, usage, or contribution guidance for an internal tier; it is not itself a package README.
Documentation: no installation or build instructions · ×3README.md
What to do
Resolve the 3 Documentation finding(s) in Documentation Quality — start with README.md (3). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (3 recommendation-level).
Detailed fixes: d19_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.
What it measures: Whether names — types, methods, variables — are clear and consistent.
Method: Judged by language model at low temperature (0.0-0.1) on a deterministic random symbol sample (fixed size, not exhaustive), with disclosed confidence band. Advisory, sampled.
0 naming inconsistencies across 0 sampled symbols.
✓ On the Gold path — maintain.
Detailed fixes: d21_recommendation.md.
Do you agree with this assessment?
D22 · Internal API ConsistencyExemplary◐ Sampled · advisory
What it measures: Whether the internal API surface is consistent and coherent.
Method: Judged by language model at low temperature over a sample of the public API surface (IsPackable or .Contracts types). Sampled, advisory; confidence discounted by model uncertainty.
What it measures: Whether any secrets were ever committed — scanned across the full git history, not just now.
Method: Secret scan via TWO gitleaks detect passes in an isolated checkout — the full git history, then a second --no-git pass over the working tree as it stands — merged and de-duplicated by (rule, file, line); each match flagged High. Both invocations are recorded in the audit trail. Exhaustive; when the tool is absent, or when its output cannot be parsed into the expected shape, the dimension is WITHHELD as an explicit measurement gap on our side — unscored and excluded from the lens, never a hedged middling score.
What it measures: Real static-analysis (SAST) findings — likely security bugs in the code, any language.
Method: Polyglot static analysis via semgrep across the repo using the pinned, image-baked p/security-audit + p/owasp-top-ten rulesets (no scan-time registry fetch); severity rules (ERROR/WARNING/INFO) map to a full-band severity-weighted score. Exhaustive, deterministic; degrades on parse failure.
Coverage: semgrep pattern rules over all files — exhaustive for the rule set, blind to classes of bug without a rule (clean = no rule matched).
semgrep found no security issues. semgrep hit a parse error in 17 file(s) — `Adapter/AbstractAdapter.php` (line 174), `Adapter/AbstractTagAwareAdapter.php` (line 196), `Adapter/DoctrineDbalAdapter.php` (line 148), `Adapter/TraceableAdapter.php` (line 38), `CacheBundle.php` (line 230), … (+12 more) — so no absence of findings in the named regions is evidence of anything; rows reported elsewhere in those files are real. Fix the syntax error (or exclude the file deliberately) and re-scan to cover them.
What it measures: Whether anyone still has living knowledge of each file, or it has been orphaned — last understood long ago by someone now gone quiet. The sibling of the bus factor: D16 asks who owns it, D34 asks whether anyone still knows it.
Method: File orphaning as total living-knowledge decay below one focused-commit's worth within a year, computed per-file from the D16 decay model. Exhaustive, deterministic over fixed history.
2 of 51 significant source file(s) are orphaned — their living knowledge has decayed to nothing, so no one currently understands them. The largest is Traits/RedisCluster63ProxyTrait.php. Counted over 51 of the 92 production source files in this repository: the rest are under the ~2,400-byte size floor this dimension measures over.
What it measures: Whether files that change together actually belong together — pairs that repeatedly co-change in git history despite having no explicit code dependency, surfacing the hidden/logical coupling (and boundaries in the wrong place) a static scan can't see.
Method: Pairwise co-occurrence over the per-commit file sets in git history (production source only — tests and generated dropped): Degree-of-Coupling = shared ÷ min individual revisions, reported above noise floors (each file ≥10 revisions, ≥5 shared commits, ≥50% strength); sweeping commits excluded. Deterministic over fixed history.
Coverage: Population: PRODUCTION source files only — test and generated files are dropped before pairing, so a class co-changing with its own test (trivially ~100%) can't drown the real production↔production coupling. Pairs ranked by Degree-of-Coupling. A non-source file is never a coupling PARTICIPANT either: documentation, schemas, config and data files are dropped with the rest, so a code↔docs pair — a command and the reference page that restates it — is not reported however strongly the two co-change; nor is coupling that runs THROUGH a build step or config file.
Resolve the 1 Change coupling finding(s) in Change Coupling — start with ArrayAdapter.php. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).
Detailed fixes: d35_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.
What it measures: Whether anyone still ships security patches for the platform this repository RUNS ON — the runtime it pins and the framework majors its own constraints hold it to. Separate from D12 because the question differs: a current Django on an end-of-life Python is perfectly up to date and completely unsupported, and the fix is a migration rather than a version bump. What the repository says it merely SUPPORTS is never charged.
Method: End-of-life PLATFORM read from the repository's own declarations and graded against a FROZEN, dated table of vendor support dates — no network, no feed, no API, so this dimension answers identically inside a closed scan fence. Two subjects: a RUNTIME the project pins (a single or all-end-of-life TargetFramework, a .nvmrc or .python-version, a requires-python CAP) and a FRAMEWORK major a dependency constraint cannot move off (a caret, tilde or exact version; `vue@^2.7.16` pins Vue 2). A FLOOR is deliberately never charged — `requires-python = ">=3.8"` states what a package SUPPORTS, not what it runs on — and a multi-target project is charged only when EVERY target is out of support. Runtime 4.0/product capped 8.0, framework 1.5 capped 4.5. The table is safe to freeze because a statement about support that ended in the past cannot become false: it loses recall as it ages, never precision, and a test asserts every entry predates the freeze date. Disjoint from D31 (a container image's OS layer) and D29 (the toolchain a CI workflow installs). Abstains when the repository declares no platform this pass reads — never scores it clean.
0 end-of-life runtime(s) and 0 end-of-life framework(s), read from 0 platform declaration(s) and 5 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.
Other · Architecture — How the codebase splits by code ROLE — domain, application, infrastructure, test, generated. The significance map behind the knowledge/coupling weighting, and a DDD signal in its own right: a thin domain core under fat infrastructure is the anemic-domain smell, quantified. How each file's role is decided, because the split is only as good as that: a generated name or a build-output tree makes it Generated, a test project makes it Test, and otherwise the file's NAMESPACE and PATH words are matched against fixed vocabularies in a fixed ORDER — domain, then infrastructure, then application — so a file whose words hit two layers is counted under the earlier one. A production file matching none of them counts as application, so that share reads 'application or unclassified' rather than a measured application layer. Roles come from naming convention, never from what the code does. On this repository the split was taken from the source tree on disk rather than from a loaded .NET workspace, so a file's role is decided by its PATH segments alone — no declared namespace was available to add to the evidence — and generated output is excluded from the census entirely rather than counted as a generated share.
Method: Roslyn line-count by code ROLE: every source file classified Domain/Application/Infrastructure/Test/Generated by namespace + path convention (the shared CodeRoleClassifier), then significant lines summed per role. Deterministic; the advisory score is the business-logic (domain+application) share of production code.
Coverage: Population: ALL source files, each bucketed into ONE of five roles (Domain/Application/Infrastructure/Test/Generated) by namespace + path convention — a file whose layer isn't named in the convention falls to Application (the neutral default), and the split is line-count, not semantic depth or business value.
What to do
The domain core is a small share of production code, but most of the rest matched no layer vocabulary at all — so this is not yet an anemic-domain finding. The namespace/path convention could not place that code, which makes the composition above a statement about the naming, not about the design. Name the layers (or check that the repository's conventions differ from the ones this check knows) before reading a thin domain into it.
Other · Architecture — Whether the project-reference graph is acyclic (cycles block independent build/deploy and signal eroding boundaries).
Method: Project reference cycles via elementary-DFS over real .csproj references, using the engine shared with D5/D7; cyclic versus acyclic. Exhaustive, deterministic.
Other · Architecture — Whether dependencies point inward (Domain ← Application ← Infrastructure/Web) — the clean-architecture dependency rule, checked across the project graph.
Method: Layer violations by name-segment inference (Domain/Core to Application to Infrastructure/Web) over the project-reference graph. Exhaustive over all projects, deterministic.
Maturity · Maturity — Whether the repo and its projects have a README, and whether it's substantive and current.
Method: Filesystem scan: README presence, word count, and headings for depth; git history for staleness. Exhaustive across root and project dirs, deterministic.
The root README is 92 words, against a bar of 120. Of the three newcomer-critical sections this check looks for by heading, it found no a build/run or getting-started section, no a testing section, no an architecture or project-map section. Sections are matched on HEADING text only, so material written under a heading this check does not recognise — or with no heading at all — is not seen and this row may understate what the document covers.
What to do
Expand the README with getting-started, architecture overview and a project map.
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.
Maturity · Maturity — Whether key decisions (ADRs) and the high-level shape (C4/diagrams) are written down.
Method: Filesystem scan: ADR folder/naming conventions or content, plus Mermaid/PlantUML/C4/architecture.md discovery. Exhaustive, deterministic.
No Architecture Decision Records found — no conventional ADR directory, no numbered `NNNN-title` documents in any markup this check reads, and nothing ADR-shaped by content. Design rationale recorded elsewhere (a design-notes tree, a mailing list, pull-request discussion) is not visible to this check and is not re-findable per decision, so a future maintainer cannot ask why one choice was made and get an answer.
No C4/Structurizr/PlantUML/Mermaid/Graphviz/D2 diagram, no drawn diagram named for the architecture, no file named `architecture` or `design` in any markup this check reads, and nothing in the README, docs or contributor guides that announces the shape — no `## Architecture` heading, no "architecture overview"/"high-level design" phrasing, no "the architecture is …" introduction, no guided code tour. A shape laid out in prose that never names itself as the architecture is not visible to this check, and neither is one kept outside the repository, so this row reports the absence of a re-findable shape document — not evidence that nobody wrote the shape down.
What to do
Record your significant design decisions. Write one short document per decision, giving its date, the situation, the decision and its consequences, and keep them together with your other design documents. A docs/adr folder with each file named by number and title is the easiest place to find them.
Add a C4 context/container diagram (Structurizr, PlantUML or Mermaid) or an architecture.md overview.
Maturity · Maturity — Whether the repo is organised deliberately — src/test separation and consistent project naming.
Method: Filesystem scan: src/test folder separation and namespace-prefix consistency (majority RootNamespace agreement). Exhaustive across projects, deterministic.
Production code isn't grouped under a src/ folder — it's spread across several top-level directories, so there's no one place that says 'this is the product'.
What to do
Group production code under src/ (or split deliberately, e.g. backend/ + frontend/) so production and tooling code aren't mixed at the root.
Maturity · Maturity — Whether the README actually describes the code that exists (LLM-judged, advisory).
Method: Judged by language model at low temperature: README accuracy versus actual projects, within a disclosed tolerance. Advisory, not a measured number.
Do you agree with this assessment?
P1 · CI/CD gates0.0 / 10Critical✓ Tool-verified
Readiness · Readiness — Whether an automated pipeline builds and tests every change.
Method: Filesystem scan: CI workflow files (.github/workflows, .gitlab-ci.yml, etc.) for build and test stages. Exhaustive, deterministic.
No CI workflow found (.github/workflows, azure-pipelines.yml, .gitlab-ci.yml, …) — changes aren't gated by an automated build/test.
What to do
Add a CI workflow that builds and runs the test suite on every push/PR.
Do you agree with this assessment?
P10 · Library API & versioning10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged
Readiness · Readiness — For a library: a deliberate (small) public API surface and explicit semantic versioning so consumers can depend on it safely.
Method: Roslyn scan: public API surface area and semantic-versioning markers (SemVer attributes, changelog entries) for libraries; off .NET, a library is the ecosystem's publication act (an npm package that is not private and names an entry point, a PyPI distribution with a build system, a Rust library crate, a Maven/Gradle module that publishes, a Go module with no package main, a gemspec, a Composer library, a SwiftPM library product, a pub.dev or Hex package), its surface is the share of types the language model records as public (Rust, Swift, Java, Kotlin, Go, Dart; not measured where the model records no type visibility or, as in TypeScript, only module-level export), and its version is read from the manifest, a semver CHANGELOG, release tooling or semver git tags. Exhaustive, deterministic.
Readiness · Readiness — Whether SAST, secret/dependency scanning and performance benchmarking are wired in (presence, not runtime).
Method: Filesystem scan: SAST configuration, dependency-update automation, secret scanning, and a benchmark harness or benchmark step — in this repository's own ecosystem. Exhaustive, deterministic.
No static application security testing detected. For this repository's stack, add phpstan or psalm (or `semgrep --config=auto`, which runs on any language) — this repository has no CI pipeline yet, so run it locally to clear the existing findings, then make it a step of the first workflow you add so a regression fails the build. What was searched, so you can tell an absence from a miss: the 0 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
Run what this repository's stack ships: phpstan or psalm — or `semgrep --config=auto`, which runs on any language — locally for now, since there is no CI pipeline here yet, and as a step of the first workflow you add so a security regression fails the build instead of landing.
Enable Dependabot/Renovate or a dependency-review gate.
Add gitleaks/trufflehog in CI to block PRs that introduce committed secrets.
Other · Security — Whether a hand-rolled public/private IP check can be walked past — a method that unwraps IPv4-mapped IPv6 but returns the opposite verdict for the same host written as IPv4-compatible, 6to4 or NAT64.
Method: Roslyn syntax + semantics: methods that unwrap IPv4-mapped IPv6 and hand-roll IPv4 range carve-outs, checked for whether the IPv6 branch also accounts for the IPv4-compatible, 6to4 and NAT64 embeddings. Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.
Do you agree with this assessment?
X15 · Unvalidated length from an untrusted reader10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged
Other · Security — Whether a length read out of the stream being parsed is bounded before it is allocated or read — an unchecked count taken from the input lets the input choose the allocation.
Method: Roslyn syntax + semantics: integer lengths read from a BinaryReader and spent on a bulk read or an array allocation, checked for any comparison or bounding call on the value anywhere in the method. Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.
Other · Code Health — Whether a loop that shortens a string until it fits a length budget has a floor — one with none grinds the value down to the empty string, or past it into a negative-length `Substring`.
Method: Roslyn syntax + semantics: while/do loops whose body's only effect on a string is to drop its last character, checked for whether anything — a direct comparison on the length, a body guard, a break — bounds that length below. On a repository with no .NET source it reads JavaScript/TypeScript off the engine’s own token stream (test, vendored and minified paths not) with the same rule: a `while`/`do` loop whose body’s one assignment to a value is `x = x.slice(0, -1)` or `x = x.slice|substring|substr(0, x.length - 1)`, driven by a condition that reads `x.length` only as a term of a larger expression — never compared directly, never tested for truthiness, and with no other read of `x` — and whose body has no `break`, `return`, `throw` or `if` naming `x`. Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.
Other · Code Health — Whether a type's disposal matches what it OWNS — releasing what it created, leaving alone what it was handed, and not declaring a finalizer for state that has nothing unmanaged to finalize.
Method: Roslyn syntax + semantics: every assignment to a disposable field is read to decide whether the type CREATED the value or was handed it, and the type's disposal is checked against that answer — an injected interface it disposes, a value it constructed and never releases, a finalizer on a type holding nothing unmanaged, and a disposable local whose every reference is a plain member read. A value handed to a container that disposes its contents (a parent control's `Controls` collection, a component `IContainer`) is released by that container and is not reported; generated code is out of population. On a repository with no .NET source the same ownership questions are read in JavaScript/TypeScript off the engine’s own token stream (test, vendored, generated and minified paths not): a class declaring `dispose()`, `[Symbol.dispose]()` or `[Symbol.asyncDispose]()` that disposes a field it was handed through a constructor parameter typed as a repository interface or resolved by a dependency-injection container; that assigns a field only ever from `new X(…)` of a disposable class and neither releases it anywhere in the class nor names it in its disposal member or a method that member calls, nor hands it to anything else; and a `const`/`let` local built from literals only whose every reference opens a statement operating on a non-release member of it. A class is disposable when every repository declaration of its name declares or inherits a disposal member, or when it is a documented library disposable (`vscode` EventEmitter, CancellationTokenSource and Disposable; three.js geometries, materials, textures, render targets, renderers, controls and composers). The finalizer arm has no JavaScript counterpart: a class cannot declare one. Dart is read for the owned-and-never-released arm: a Flutter `State` (or a class declaring `dispose()`/`close()`) whose library-private field is written only with direct creations of a framework controller, `FocusNode`, `StreamController` or periodic `Timer` (or a `.listen(…)` into a field declared `StreamSubscription`), which nothing in the class or its library releases (`dispose`/`close`/`cancel`) and which is never handed on except as a named argument. Ruby is read for the owned-and-never-released arm and the abandoned-local arm: a class declaring an instance `close`, `dispose`, `shutdown`, `stop`, `disconnect` or `terminate` whose instance variable is written only with a blockless core descriptor creation (`File.open`/`new`, `Tempfile`, `Dir.open`, `IO.popen`, the `socket` and `openssl` socket classes) that no method of the class closes and that is never handed on (passed, returned, stored, exposed by `attr_reader`, delegated) — a class whose superclass or mixin lies outside the repository is not judged — and a blockless creation read through and dropped (`File.open(path).read`) or held in a local that is never closed, returned, passed or stored (a `&:read` block-pass, an `autoclose: false` borrow and a `fileno` hand-over are not abandonment). PHP is read for the same two arms: a class (not a trait, and not one using a trait) declaring an instance `close`, `dispose`, `shutdown`, `stop`, `disconnect` or `terminate` whose `private` property (or a `final` class's `protected` one) is written only with a direct core `fopen`, `tmpfile`, `popen`, `proc_open`, `fsockopen`, `stream_socket_client`/`server` or `opendir` that nothing in the class closes (`fclose`, `pclose`, `closedir`, `unset`, a reset to `null`) and that is never handed on, and a handle held in a function's local, or read through as the argument of a reader, that is never closed, returned, passed, captured or stored; a `php://` stream, `curl_init`, `SplFileObject`, `PDO` and a function the repository declares under the core name are not read. Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.
Other · Code Health — Whether a method that temporarily changes state belonging to the whole process — the working directory, an environment variable — puts it back on EVERY path: a restore reached only when nothing throws leaks the change to the rest of the process.
Method: Roslyn syntax + semantics: method bodies that write the process working directory or an environment variable and write it back in the same body, checked for whether that restore sits in a `finally`/`catch` or only on the straight-line path. On a repository with no .NET source the same rule reads production JavaScript/TypeScript off the engine’s own token stream (test, vendored and minified paths not): `process.chdir`, `process.env.NAME =`/`["NAME"] =` and `delete process.env.NAME`, and Deno’s `Deno.chdir`/`Deno.env.set`/`Deno.env.delete`, paired per function body (a nested function or arrow is its own body, and module top-level code is none), where the last write puts back a local the body captured from the same global or deletes a variable the first write set, with at least one statement between them; a write in a `catch`/`finally` of that body silences it. Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.
Other · Code Health — Whether a `when` guard is free of side effects — a guard that increments a counter or assigns while deciding whether its arm matches applies that change during PATTERN MATCHING, on an arm that may not be selected, and skips it entirely when a short-circuit to its left answers first.
Method: Roslyn syntax: `when` guards on case labels and switch-expression arms, read for a mutation (`++`/`--`/assignment) sitting in a position the guard's own `&&`/`||`/`??`/`?:`/`?.` can skip. Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.
Other · Code Health — Whether a method that TAKES a lock or semaphore and gives it back from a flag-guarded `finally` returns the value that flag implies — reporting success while the guard hands the primitive back admits a second caller the exclusion was there to keep out, and reporting failure while the guard keeps it leaves nothing to ever give it back.
Method: Roslyn syntax: `try` statements whose `finally` releases a synchronisation primitive under a bare local-bool guard, where the method also TOOK that same primitive before the `try`, checked for a `return` of a bool literal whose value disagrees with the flag state the method's own straight-line assignments put it in. Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.
Other · Code Health — Whether the work a diagnostic log line costs is paid only when that line is wanted — C# evaluates a call's arguments BEFORE the call, so a trace/debug message joined or projected out of a collection is built in full on every pass, and then discarded by a sink the shipped configuration leaves switched off.
Method: Roslyn syntax: log calls at a diagnostic level (a `Log`-prefixed method naming Trace/Debug/Verbose, or a bare `Debug`/`Trace`/`Verbose` on a receiver named for a logger), whose argument list is read for a call whose cost scales with a sequence — a LINQ operator, a materialisation, `string.Join`, a serializer — with no enclosing level check or conditional-compilation region. On a repository with no .NET source it reads JavaScript/TypeScript off the engine’s own token stream (test, vendored and minified paths not) with the same rule: a `debug`/`trace`/`verbose` call on a receiver named for a logger, or a `log`-prefixed method naming the level, whose argument calls an array operator (`map`/`filter`/`reduce`/`sort`/…), `Array.from`, `Object.keys/values/entries`, `JSON.stringify`/`util.inspect` over anything but a literal, or an array `join` — outside any arrow or function passed as an argument, which the logger calls only when the level is on — with no enclosing `if`, `&&` or `?:` whose condition names a level, a level string, or the `NODE_ENV`/`__DEV__`/`DEV` build switch. Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.
Other · Code Health — Whether a value the caller is invited to supply is the value the type actually uses — a constructor parameter stored in a private field that nothing ever reads while the default it was given is spelled out a second time at the site that should have read it, a keyed lookup that falls back to a different setting than the one its key names while the same type falls back to the matching one for that same key, or a culture-sensitive parse given no format provider by a type that feeds its own settable culture to the same kind of parse elsewhere, or a number an entry point writes to standard output under the host's culture while the same entry point formats with the invariant culture elsewhere. Either way, every caller who supplies a value silently gets something else.
Method: Roslyn syntax: private instance fields of a non-partial type assigned in a constructor from one of its own parameters with a `??` fallback, checked for whether anything in the type body reads the field and whether that same fallback expression is spelled out again outside the constructor; and `??` fallbacks onto a member access from a lookup call carrying exactly one string literal, grouped by that key across the type and checked for a fallback member whose folded name disagrees with the key while a sibling site for the same key agrees with it. On a repository with no .NET source the first two arms read JavaScript/TypeScript off the engine’s own token stream (tests included, bundles and vendored paths not): a `#x`, `private` or `private` parameter-property instance field filled in the constructor from a parameter (or one member of one) through `??`/`||` or a parameter default, never read anywhere in the file by name, whose constructed default is spelled again in the class body; and `lookup("key") ?? s.member` grouped by key per class, or per module outside every class. The culture arm has no JavaScript counterpart: its parses take no locale. Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.
Do you agree with this assessment?
X28 · Index access outside its own emptiness guard10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged
Other · Code Health — Whether a condition that tests a value for emptiness indexes that same value only where the test holds — an `||` written one parenthesis too far to the left leaves an index access outside the guard beside it, so the empty case the guard exists to anticipate reaches the index and throws.
Method: Roslyn syntax only, no semantic model: the OUTERMOST `&&`/`||` of every boolean condition, read for a symbol the condition tests for emptiness (`string.IsNullOrEmpty`/`IsNullOrWhiteSpace`, a `Length`/`Count` comparison against a literal, `Any()`, a `Length`/`Count` pattern, or a comparison against `""`) and ALSO indexes. Each `symbol[...]` access is placed by a boolean-reachability walk from the access up to the outermost connective: an access is COVERED when some enclosing step has it in the right operand and the left operand, under the truth value that step forces, proves the symbol non-empty — a recursion over `&&`/`||` whose true- and false-directions are asymmetric. A finding needs BOTH an uncovered access and a covered one on the same symbol in the same condition, which is the agreeing twin that separates a misplaced parenthesis from an unrelated length test. Bare index accesses with no emptiness test in the condition are neither counted nor reported; a non-identifier receiver and a lambda nested inside the condition are outside the population. Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.
Other · Code Health — Whether exceptions are handled rather than silently swallowed or rethrown with lost stack traces.
Method: Roslyn syntax scan: every catch clause counted; empty catches and bare rethrows flagged. Population is all catch clauses, not estimated. Deterministic, hard fact.
`catch (\Throwable)` takes every exception and records none of it — the body neither logs it, rethrows it, nor even names it, so the failure is discarded as completely as by an empty catch and only the substituted value survives. Log it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems, narrow the catch to the exception this call can actually raise, or say in a comment on the catch why the failure genuinely cannot matter. (×3) — Adapter/PhpArrayAdapter.php:105, Adapter/PhpArrayAdapter.php:131, Traits/RedisTrait.php:712
`catch (\Exception)` takes every exception and records none of it — the body neither logs it, rethrows it, nor even names it, so the failure is discarded as completely as by an empty catch and only the substituted value survives. Log it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems, narrow the catch to the exception this call can actually raise, or say in a comment on the catch why the failure genuinely cannot matter. (×3) — Adapter/CouchbaseCollectionAdapter.php:191, Adapter/AbstractTagAwareAdapter.php:274, Messenger/EarlyExpirationMessage.php:28
An empty catch block silently discards the error — failures vanish with no log and no rethrow. Log it, handle it, or don't catch it. (×2) — Adapter/AbstractTagAwareAdapter.php:282, Traits/AbstractAdapterTrait.php:165
What to do
Swallowed exception (caught, then discarded)
Do you agree with this assessment?
X30 · Support guard that admits what it rejects10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged
Other · Code Health — Whether a guard written as a NEGATED `||` says what its author meant — `!(a || b || x != k)` is `!a && !b && x == k` by De Morgan, so a bail-out that mixes capabilities the code needs with a fault it refuses turns inside out: it fires only where the capabilities are ABSENT, and lets every value the fault term names walk straight into the body that cannot handle it.
Method: Roslyn syntax only, no semantic model: every logical-not whose operand is a parenthesised `||` chain of two or more disjuncts, flattened (a left-nested `a || b || c` read once would see `(a || b)` as one disjunct). A site enters the population on that shape alone. A finding additionally needs the disjuncts to DISAGREE in polarity: at least one bare boolean read — an identifier or member access, never an invocation, which is a predicate rather than a capability flag — and at least one `x != <constant>`, the only form that negates into an exact-value pin (`== null` negates into a looser requirement and is outside the fault set). Consistently-polarised disjunctions, all-fault or all-capability, are counted and never reported; a negated `&&` is outside the population entirely. No same-receiver gate: it was measured to cost a real defect and remove no false positive. Deterministic, provable per finding. Advisory.
Other · Code Health — Whether log calls use message templates (queryable) rather than interpolated strings.
Method: Roslyn syntax scan: every log call-site counted; interpolated-string first-argument violations flagged. Population is all log calls, not estimated. On a repository with no .NET source it reads JavaScript/TypeScript off the engine’s own token stream (test, vendored and minified paths not) with the same rule: a `trace`/`debug`/`info`/`warn`/`error`/`fatal`/`verbose`/`silly`/`http`/`log` call on a receiver named for a logger, in a package whose own or an enclosing `package.json` declares a logger that carries values as fields (pino, pino-http, nestjs-pino, Fastify, winston, bunyan, tslog, LogTape, roarr), whose first deciding argument is a template literal with substitutions; an object-literal fields argument is stepped over, a plain string message clears the call. Python is read the same way: a `debug`/`info`/`warning`/`error`/`exception`/`critical`/`log` call on a logger in a file that imports the standard library’s `logging` or structlog (loguru, which formats at the call, is not judged), whose message is a whole f-string with a non-constant field; a `%`-formatted, `.format()`-ed or concatenated message is not convicted, as in C#. PHP is read the same way: a PSR-3 level call (`emergency`…`debug`, `log`) on a logger (`$logger`, `$this->logger`, Laravel’s `Log::`, `logger()`, `\Drupal::logger()`) in a package whose `composer.json` requires a PSR-3 logger or a framework that hands one out (psr/log, Monolog, Laravel, Symfony, Drupal, CakePHP), or a file that imports one, whose message is a double-quoted string interpolating a variable; a single-quoted message clears the call, and `sprintf` or `.` concatenation is not convicted, as in C#. Dart is read the same way: a `trace`/`debug`/`info`/`warn`/`error`/`fatal` call on Sentry’s structured logger (`Sentry.logger`) whose message is a whole string literal interpolating a value (`$name`, `${…}`); the `Sentry.logger.fmt` template API clears the call. Dart that logs only through loggers with one message and no fields (package:logging, package:logger, talker, dart:developer) is not applicable rather than a reach gap. Ruby is read the same way: a `trace`/`debug`/`info`/`warn`/`error`/`fatal` call on the console gem’s `Console` (declared by a Gemfile, gemspec or Gemfile.lock, or required) or, where SemanticLogger, Ougai or dry-logger is declared or required, on a receiver named for a logger (`logger`, `@logger`, `Rails.logger`, `log`), whose first deciding argument is, as the whole argument, a double-quoted string interpolating a non-constant value (`#{…}`, `#@ivar`); a plain literal clears the call, keyword arguments are the fields, and a block, `%`-format or `+` concatenation is not convicted. Ruby that logs only through the standard Logger (Rails.logger) is not applicable rather than a reach gap. Deterministic.
Other · Code Health — Whether PHP's static analysis checks null and is not undermined by a nullness baseline — PHPStan from level 8 (`checkNullables`) or Psalm at `errorLevel` 3 or stricter is what makes `?User` a type whose method call is an error, and the null entries of a baseline, `@psalm-suppress PossiblyNull…` and `@phpstan-ignore *.nonObject` are what silence it.
Method: Roslyn compiler-options scan: NullableContextOptions per project; null-forgiving (!) suppression density per 1k syntax nodes. Deterministic, adoption plus suppression penalty.
This repository commits no PHPStan or Psalm configuration (`phpstan.neon[.dist]`, `phpstan.dist.neon`, `psalm.xml[.dist]`, or one a composer.json script names with `--configuration`), so nothing checks null: a `?Customer` reaches `->name()` silently and throws `Error: Call to a member function name() on null` the first time it is null. If the build passes a level on a command line instead, put it in a committed configuration — this check reads configuration, and configuration is all it can read.
What to do
Raise PHPStan to level 8 (`level: 8` in `phpstan.neon.dist`, or `max`) or Psalm to `errorLevel="3"` or stricter, so `?Type` is a type the checker holds you to; generate a baseline for what that surfaces only to pay it down, not to keep it. Then resolve the baselined nullness errors rather than adding to them: each is a call on a value the checker showed could be null — narrow it (`if ($x === null) { … }`, `?->`, an early return), make the property non-nullable and initialise it in the constructor, or change the return type so the null cannot arrive.
Do you agree with this assessment?
Reference — by lens
The score is the rank-weighted fold of these lenses (worst-heaviest), each including its meta-dimensions; a lens with a Critical contributor is capped at Fair (its band reads "gated by …") and is never the strongest area however high its average.
Unscored — 1 check(s) recorded observations but carry no score
These checks ran and found something, but they do not carry a score — either by design (an advisory check reports evidence rather than grading it) or because they could not be scored here. They are excluded from the score for that reason, not because there was nothing to see.
X10 Duplicated predicate — 6 observation(s) recorded · Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score.
Not evidenced — 5 control(s) we could not find positive evidence for
These checks grade a working control, and the repository shows no evidence of one. That is deliberately not scored as a zero: a repository cannot show an ops runbook, a database TTL or an infrastructure-side audit log, so absence of evidence here is not evidence the control is missing. It is also not a statement that the check is irrelevant to this codebase — the thing it grades applies; we just could not see it. Excluded from the score either way.
C3 Audit Trail — Not assessed: this repository stores data through 'PDO' (Traits/PdoTrait.php:82) but declares no persisted model this check reads (Laravel migration columns, Eloquent $fillable/$hidden lists, Doctrine #[ORM\Column] properties). Personal data may be written through raw SQL or a hosted backend, so whether its changes need an audit trail could not be established, and the trail's absence is not scored.
C4 Data Retention — Not assessed: this repository stores data through 'PDO' (Traits/PdoTrait.php:82) but declares no persisted model this check reads (Laravel migration columns, Eloquent $fillable/$hidden lists, Doctrine #[ORM\Column] properties). Personal data may be written through raw SQL or a hosted backend, so whether a retention limit applies here could not be established, and its absence is not scored.
C5 Data-Subject Rights — Not assessed: this repository stores data through 'PDO' (Traits/PdoTrait.php:82) but declares no persisted model this check reads (Laravel migration columns, Eloquent $fillable/$hidden lists, Doctrine #[ORM\Column] properties). Personal data may be written through raw SQL or a hosted backend, so whether data-subject rights apply here could not be established, and their absence is not scored.
P4 Deployment & Rollback — not evidenced — no deploy/rollback/approval signal in the repo; absence of evidence is not evidence of a manual release
P5 DR & Backup — not evidenced — repo shows no backup/RTO/RPO controls; absence of evidence is not evidence of a working control
Not included — 69 check(s) not relevant to this codebase
These checks had nothing to measure here (no tests, no git history, the codebase is small, or the architecture style doesn't apply), so they're omitted above rather than scored low.
AC1 Text alternatives — No web markup found — accessibility is not applicable to this repository.
AC2 Forms & labels — No web markup found — accessibility is not applicable to this repository.
AC3 Page structure — No web markup found — accessibility is not applicable to this repository.
AC4 Keyboard semantics — No web markup found — accessibility is not applicable to this repository.
AC5 ARIA correctness — No web markup found — accessibility is not applicable to this repository.
AC6 Visual & motion safety — No web markup found — accessibility is not applicable to this repository.
AC7 A11y enforcement — No web markup found — accessibility is not applicable to this repository.
AX1 Captive dependencies — not analysed — these correctness checks read a source model that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
AX2 Stateful singletons — Not applicable: PHP builds its object graph per request and shares none of it between requests.
AX5 Architecture & structure — not assessed — architecture style/structure is computed from a project graph (projects, types, module namespaces) that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
AX6 Interface segregation — not assessed — interface segregation is computed over a type surface that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
AX7 Slice cohesion — not applicable — not a vertical-slice architecture
AX8 Test isolation — no test/production split to check
AX9 CQS / query purity — no CQRS query handlers detected — query purity is not applicable to this codebase
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 — Not assessed: this repository stores data through 'PDO' (Traits/PdoTrait.php:82) but declares no persisted model this check reads (Laravel migration columns, Eloquent $fillable/$hidden lists, Doctrine #[ORM\Column] properties). Personal data may be written through raw SQL or a hosted backend, so the absence of a personal-data field here is not evidence that none is stored, and encryption at rest is not scored over a subject that could not be established.
C2 Access Controls — No access-control surface detected in the analyzed source — this repository registers no route (no Laravel Route::…, no Symfony #[Route], no Filament panel, no WordPress REST route or AJAX action). Access control is therefore N/A here — a Composer library is authorized by the application that mounts it, not by itself. If this codebase grows request handlers, the dimension reactivates and a default-deny posture is expected then.
D11 Test Reliability — Test reliability not included — no .php test runner
D12 Dependency Hygiene — Not scored — 5 direct Composer requirement(s) were read, but the outdated signal needs Packagist, and no committed composer.lock resolves them to releases, so this dimension's own question is only partly answered. NOT a finding that these dependencies are current or healthy.
D14 License Compliance — Composer package licences not graded — this repository commits no composer.lock and this pass does not run Composer's solver
D18 Solution Shape — D18 scores the shape of a .NET solution; this repository has no .NET solution or project files, so the dimension does not apply.
D20 ADR Quality — N/A — ADRs are expected on deployable products with a user-facing host, not consumed libraries; no ADR log is required here.
D23 Boundary Type-Coupling — No bounded-context organisation was detected either — neither a context-shaped layout nor 2+ sibling source directories each declaring an aggregate root. Declaring this codebase's bounded contexts (≥2) would let cross-boundary type coupling be assessed. Declare them in `.codehealth/config.yaml` at the repository root (create it if absent), mapping each context name to the module-path or namespace prefixes that belong to it — e.g. `architecture:` → `contexts:` → `Billing: ["src/billing", "Acme.Billing"]`, `Catalog: ["src/catalog", "Acme.Catalog"]`.
D24 Comment Value — No inline comments to assess — comment value is not applicable here.
D25 ADR Conformance — no ADRs to check
D27 Navigability — D27 counts a call into the standard library or a dependency as unresolved for this repository's language (.php), so too few call sites counted as resolved to assess navigability. Not scored: this is a gap in the analyzer, not a verdict about this repository.
D30 Dependency Vulnerabilities — Not scored — no dependency manifest in a supported ecosystem was read for this repository. A gap in the analyzer's language coverage, NOT a finding that the repository is free of vulnerable dependencies (composer.json — not scanned yet).
D31 IaC & Container Security — No Infrastructure-as-Code or container manifests found (Dockerfile, Docker Compose, Terraform, Kubernetes/Helm, CloudFormation, ARM, Bicep, Ansible); nothing to scan.
D32 Data Compliance (PII/GDPR) — 10 file(s) were not parsed by semgrep — the PII/GDPR ruleset never ran over them
D36 Supply-chain Provenance & Signing — No CI/build pipeline found (.github/.forgejo/.gitea workflows, .circleci, .buildkite, .woodpecker, .teamcity, .gitlab-ci.yml, .travis.yml, bitbucket-pipelines.yml, .drone.yml, .cirrus.yml, .woodpecker.yml, appveyor.yml, azure-pipelines*.yml, .pipelines/, .vsts-ci/, .azuredevops/, Jenkinsfile); there is no build to attest provenance for.
D37 Vulnerability-disclosure Policy — No vulnerability-disclosure policy file found (SECURITY.md/.markdown/.rst/.txt at root or under .github/.forgejo/.gitea/docs, .well-known/security.txt). A coordinated-disclosure policy may live off-repo, so this is not evidenced rather than failed.
D39 IL Efficiency — D39 measures the IL emitted by a .NET build; this repository has no .NET solution or project files, so the dimension does not apply.
D40 Network Egress Confinement — No Kubernetes/orchestration workloads found in the repository manifests; network egress policy is a cluster-native control that may live at the platform/firewall layer, so there is nothing to assess here.
D41 Kernel & Syscall Confinement — No Kubernetes/orchestration workloads found in the repository manifests; seccomp/AppArmor/SELinux confinement is a workload-level control, so there is nothing to assess here.
D42 Runtime Threat Enforcement — No Kubernetes/orchestration workloads found in the repository manifests; runtime threat-detection and admission-control policy are cluster-level controls, so there is nothing to assess here.
D43 Malicious Dependencies — Not scored — no dependency manifest in a supported ecosystem was read for this repository. A gap in the analyzer's language coverage, NOT a finding that the repository is free of vulnerable dependencies (composer.json — not scanned yet).
D5 Coupling — Not applicable — this Composer build ships 1 production module(s), so there is no coupling BETWEEN modules to measure. (Its test and non-production modules are not part of the shipped graph.)
D7 Architectural Integrity — no checkable ADRs, and no project-reference graph for the cycle pass to read — so this dimension makes no claim about dependency cycles in either direction (where this repository's language has an import-cycle lens, cycles are reported there). Architectural integrity not assessed
D8 Code Coverage — Coverage not included — suite not readable by the collector
DM1 Domain Modelling — not scored — this repository shows none of the 3 signals this lens looks for
ED1 Event-Driven — not scored — this repository shows none of the 3 signals this lens looks for
ED5 Idempotency — no mutating command handlers or message consumers detected — idempotency check not applicable
ES1 Event Sourcing — not scored — this repository shows none of the 3 signals this lens looks for
GD1 Unfinished & placeholder code — no source files were read — this check reads C#, F#, JavaScript/TypeScript, Dart, Ruby and Scala, and none was read for this repository's product. That is a limit of the analyzer, not a finding about your code.
IC1 Incompleteness & stubs — not analysed — these correctness checks read a source model that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
P12 CI test-gate honesty — no CI workflow found
P2 Observability — This repository's PHP source (1 module(s), 92 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 — no outbound HTTP usage detected — no HTTP client call or construction in the PHP source (service entry point: Messenger/EarlyExpirationHandler.php:21 (#[AsMessageHandler))
P8 Schema migrations — no ORM, schema-migration tool or schema auto-create was found in this repository's dependency manifests or source, so there is no database schema for this check to judge
P9 Domain vs controller coverage — no coverage report found on disk — produce a coverage report in a standard format (Clover XML — with Xdebug (`XDEBUG_MODE=coverage`) or PCOV installed, `vendor/bin/phpunit --coverage-clover coverage.xml`) and commit it — a hosted scan measures a clone of the repository, so a report that exists only in a working tree, a CI runner's or your own, never reaches it; the artefact is commonly gitignored, so `git add -f` that one file (or un-ignore its path) and commit it alongside the code it measures, or wire coverage collection into CI, to enable this cross-layer check
PF1 Benchmark discipline — Not applicable: no benchmark suite was found. This check searched for PHPBench subjects (`bench*` methods, or `@Subject`/`#[Subject]` ones) in a file importing PhpBench or carrying its annotations, `bench*` methods in a `*Bench.php` file where PHPBench is installed, or phpbench/phpbench in a composer.json or a phpbench.json, and for a `*benchmark*` script that this repository's CI runs. Benchmarks are credited as a bonus, so their absence is neither scored nor deducted.
PF2 Allocation hygiene — Not applicable: PHP runs on a garbage-collected runtime that gives a program no allocation-control idiom to choose on a hot path — no pools, stack allocation or value types — so allocation awareness is not something this code can be rated on.
PF3 Async & latency hygiene — Not applicable: PHP has no async/await function colour, so there is no asynchronous code for a blocking call to stall.
S1 Web-Security Posture — Not assessed: these web-security controls are read from a source model (declarative annotations, request middleware, entity/column names, guard methods) that was not loaded for this repository — because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. Absence of an idiom this check recognises is NOT evidence that this repository lacks web-security controls: it may implement them entirely in its own ecosystem. This is a gap in the analyzer's language coverage, not a finding about this repository.
X1 Async correctness — not analysed — these correctness checks read a source model that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
X12 Unreachable branch — not analysed — these correctness checks read a source model that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
X13 Undrained process stream — not analysed — these correctness checks read a source model that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
X17 Uncapped recursion over a caller-supplied document — not analysed — these correctness checks read a source model that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
X2 Cancellation propagation — no C# was loaded; this repository's PHP was read and makes no request a caller can cancel (amphp's HttpClient or connect) — synchronous PHP offers its callers no cancellation to take
X20 Mistyped argument guard — This check asks whether an argument guard reports an EMPTY value as a NULL one, which needs a language that throws a null-specific argument exception — .NET's ArgumentNullException, the JVM's NullPointerException, Dart's ArgumentError.notNull. This repository contains none of those languages: the ones it is written in have a single exception for a bad argument, so there is no pair of exceptions to confuse and nothing here for it to assess. Not a gap in the analyzer and not a finding about your code.
X24 Document value interpolated into markup unescaped — not analysed — these correctness checks read a source model that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
X26 Unsynchronised callback handoff — Not applicable: this check looks for a collection written by a callback on one thread while the body waiting on it touches it on another, and in this repository's languages no collection is reachable from two threads at once. PHP gives a request one thread of its own; the event-loop libraries (ReactPHP, Amp) run callbacks one at a time, and ext-parallel copies every value across its channels, so no array or collection is reachable from two threads at once. Not a gap in the analyzer and not a finding about your code.
X27 Collection changed while being enumerated — not analysed — these correctness checks read a source model that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
X29 Per-element action decided by a fixed element — not analysed — these correctness checks read a source model that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
X32 Type resolved by simple name across every loaded assembly — This check is about how a .NET program searches the assemblies loaded into its process for a type, and this repository contains no .NET source, so there is nothing here for it to assess. Not a gap in the analyzer and not a finding about your code.
X6 Hand-rolled structured-format parsing — Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score, so there is nothing missing here.
X7 Silent fallback defaults — Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score, so there is nothing missing here.
X9 Subsumed condition operand — Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score, so there is nothing missing here.
Appendix A — Findings (grouped)
The findings behind the scores, grouped by severity, then by dimension and kind. The high-severity issues are enumerated in full below; items per group are capped at 25 with any overflow stated explicitly per group, never silently truncated. The complete machine-readable list of every finding (all severities) is the companion findings.md in this report's bundle.
Swallowed exception (caught, then discarded) Adapter/PhpArrayAdapter.php:105— `catch (\Throwable)` takes every exception and records none of it — the body neither logs it, rethrows it, nor even names it, so the failure is discarded as completely as by an empty catch and only the substituted value survives. Log it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems, narrow the catch to the exception this call can actually raise, or say in a comment on the catch why the failure genuinely cannot matter.
Swallowed exception (caught, then discarded) Adapter/PhpArrayAdapter.php:131— `catch (\Throwable)` takes every exception and records none of it — the body neither logs it, rethrows it, nor even names it, so the failure is discarded as completely as by an empty catch and only the substituted value survives. Log it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems, narrow the catch to the exception this call can actually raise, or say in a comment on the catch why the failure genuinely cannot matter.
Swallowed exception (caught, then discarded) Adapter/CouchbaseCollectionAdapter.php:191— `catch (\Exception)` takes every exception and records none of it — the body neither logs it, rethrows it, nor even names it, so the failure is discarded as completely as by an empty catch and only the substituted value survives. Log it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems, narrow the catch to the exception this call can actually raise, or say in a comment on the catch why the failure genuinely cannot matter.
Swallowed exception (caught, then discarded) Adapter/AbstractTagAwareAdapter.php:274— `catch (\Exception)` takes every exception and records none of it — the body neither logs it, rethrows it, nor even names it, so the failure is discarded as completely as by an empty catch and only the substituted value survives. Log it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems, narrow the catch to the exception this call can actually raise, or say in a comment on the catch why the failure genuinely cannot matter.
Swallowed exception (caught, then discarded) Messenger/EarlyExpirationMessage.php:28— `catch (\Exception)` takes every exception and records none of it — the body neither logs it, rethrows it, nor even names it, so the failure is discarded as completely as by an empty catch and only the substituted value survives. Log it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems, narrow the catch to the exception this call can actually raise, or say in a comment on the catch why the failure genuinely cannot matter.
Swallowed exception (caught, then discarded) Traits/RedisTrait.php:712— `catch (\Throwable)` takes every exception and records none of it — the body neither logs it, rethrows it, nor even names it, so the failure is discarded as completely as by an empty catch and only the substituted value survives. Log it through whatever this codebase already uses to report problems, narrow the catch to the exception this call can actually raise, or say in a comment on the catch why the failure genuinely cannot matter.
TooManyMethods: RelayProxy Traits/RelayProxy.php:31— TooManyMethods — 316 methods. The bar is 30 methods; this is 286 over it, 10.53× the bar. To reduce it, group the members that share the same data into a smaller type of their own and delegate to it, so no single type carries every responsibility.
TooManyMethods: RedisProxy Traits/RedisProxy.php:24— TooManyMethods — 253 methods. The bar is 30 methods; this is 223 over it, 8.43× the bar. To reduce it, group the members that share the same data into a smaller type of their own and delegate to it, so no single type carries every responsibility.
TooManyMethods: RelayClusterProxy Traits/RelayClusterProxy.php:30— TooManyMethods — 251 methods. The bar is 30 methods; this is 221 over it, 8.37× the bar. To reduce it, group the members that share the same data into a smaller type of their own and delegate to it, so no single type carries every responsibility.
TooManyMethods: RedisClusterProxy Traits/RedisClusterProxy.php:24— TooManyMethods — 224 methods. The bar is 30 methods; this is 194 over it, 7.47× the bar. To reduce it, group the members that share the same data into a smaller type of their own and delegate to it, so no single type carries every responsibility.
ClassTooLong: RelayProxy Traits/RelayProxy.php:31— ClassTooLong — 642 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded), 316 methods. The bar is 400 significant lines; this is 242 over it, 1.61× the bar. To reduce it, group the members that share the same data into a smaller type of their own and delegate to it, so no single type carries every responsibility.
ClassTooLong: RedisProxy Traits/RedisProxy.php:24— ClassTooLong — 511 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded), 253 methods. The bar is 400 significant lines; this is 111 over it, 1.28× the bar. To reduce it, group the members that share the same data into a smaller type of their own and delegate to it, so no single type carries every responsibility.
ClassTooLong: RelayClusterProxy Traits/RelayClusterProxy.php:30— ClassTooLong — 511 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded), 251 methods. The bar is 400 significant lines; this is 111 over it, 1.28× the bar. To reduce it, group the members that share the same data into a smaller type of their own and delegate to it, so no single type carries every responsibility.
ClassTooLong: RedisClusterProxy Traits/RedisClusterProxy.php:24— ClassTooLong — 453 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded), 224 methods. The bar is 400 significant lines; this is 53 over it, 1.13× the bar. To reduce it, group the members that share the same data into a smaller type of their own and delegate to it, so no single type carries every responsibility.
FileTooLong: Traits/RelayProxy.php Traits/RelayProxy.php— FileTooLong — 655 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded), about 98% of them inside a single declaration: RelayProxy (31-1623). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 155 over it, 1.31× the bar. Moving the declarations that sit BESIDE it into sibling files will not shorten this file. Extract from INSIDE that declaration instead: lift each cohesive group of its body — the parts that share the same inputs and are named together — into its own unit in a sibling file, and have the original call them.
FileTooLong: Traits/RedisTrait.php Traits/RedisTrait.php— FileTooLong — 526 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 26 over it, 1.05× the bar. To reduce it, split the file along the responsibilities already in it: move each cohesive group of declarations into its own sibling file in the same module or package, so no one file has to be read whole to change one of them.
FileTooLong: Traits/RelayClusterProxy.php Traits/RelayClusterProxy.php— FileTooLong — 523 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded), about 98% of them inside a single declaration: RelayClusterProxy (30-1296). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 23 over it, 1.05× the bar. Moving the declarations that sit BESIDE it into sibling files will not shorten this file. Extract from INSIDE that declaration instead: lift each cohesive group of its body — the parts that share the same inputs and are named together — into its own unit in a sibling file, and have the original call them.
FileTooLong: Traits/RedisProxy.php Traits/RedisProxy.php— FileTooLong — 517 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded), about 99% of them inside a single declaration: RedisProxy (24-1296). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 17 over it, 1.03× the bar. Moving the declarations that sit BESIDE it into sibling files will not shorten this file. Extract from INSIDE that declaration instead: lift each cohesive group of its body — the parts that share the same inputs and are named together — into its own unit in a sibling file, and have the original call them.
Duplicated block (14 lines × 2) Adapter/AbstractAdapter.php:75— Adapter/AbstractAdapter.php:75-88 | Adapter/AbstractTagAwareAdapter.php:99-112 — before extracting anything, compare `Adapter/AbstractAdapter.php` and `Adapter/AbstractTagAwareAdapter.php` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 6 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 64 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `Adapter/AbstractAdapter.php:75` it does not close everything it opens, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that.
Duplicated block (14 lines × 2) Adapter/AbstractTagAwareAdapter.php:286— Adapter/AbstractTagAwareAdapter.php:286-299 | Traits/AbstractAdapterTrait.php:171-184 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice.
Duplicated block (14 lines × 2) Adapter/PhpArrayAdapter.php:295— Adapter/PhpArrayAdapter.php:295-308 | Adapter/PhpFilesAdapter.php:234-247 — the copies sit in sibling files of one directory, so a shared home is within easy reach: extract the block into a single shared function the call sites can all reach — a file they already depend on, or a new one alongside them — and call it from both call sites, so a change lands once. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `Adapter/PhpArrayAdapter.php:295` it begins part-way through the construct above it, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that.
Duplicated block (14 lines × 2) Adapter/RedisTagAwareAdapter.php:115— Adapter/RedisTagAwareAdapter.php:115-128 | Adapter/RedisTagAwareAdapter.php:157-170 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `Adapter/RedisTagAwareAdapter.php:115` it begins part-way through the construct above it, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that. The `return` at the foot of the matched lines is the enclosing body's own terminal exit, not an early one: it moves with them unchanged, and each site calls the extracted unit from the position that `return` occupied — no decision has to be handed back and re-acted on.
Hotspot: Traits/RedisTrait.php Traits/RedisTrait.php:94— Traits/RedisTrait.php changed 7 times in last 90 days, and the most complex body those changes touched has cyclomatic complexity 150 in RedisTrait.createConnection at line 94. 3 of those changes were fix/bug commits, and the other 4 changed it for other reasons — this file is under both repair and feature pressure. Before the next change lands here, make sure the area it touches is under test, then split that area out of the file so the following change is smaller than this one — a file this often edited pays the complexity back every time. Counted over 2026-07-21..2026-10-19, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-07-21 19:23:11 +02:00' --until='2026-10-19 19:23:11 +02:00' --full-history --no-merges -- Traits/RedisTrait.php`: merges are excluded because a merge re-states changes already counted at their own commits, and history is NOT path-simplified because a change that reached the file through a merged branch is still a change to it. That command counts raw commits and can read HIGHER than this row, which counts a cherry-picked re-land, and a revert together with the commit it undoes, once each — a difference of several commits on a file whose history was re-landed or reverted inside the window.
Hotspot: LockRegistry.php LockRegistry.php:94— LockRegistry.php changed 5 times in last 90 days, and the most complex body those changes touched has cyclomatic complexity 24 in LockRegistry.compute at line 94. Frequent change and high complexity in one file compound: schedule the next change to it to include carving out the part being edited, with the area under test before it moves. Counted over 2026-07-21..2026-10-19, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-07-21 19:23:11 +02:00' --until='2026-10-19 19:23:11 +02:00' --full-history --no-merges -- LockRegistry.php`: merges are excluded because a merge re-states changes already counted at their own commits, and history is NOT path-simplified because a change that reached the file through a merged branch is still a change to it. That command counts raw commits and can read HIGHER than this row, which counts a cherry-picked re-land, and a revert together with the commit it undoes, once each — a difference of several commits on a file whose history was re-landed or reverted inside the window.
Hotspot: DependencyInjection/CachePoolPass.php DependencyInjection/CachePoolPass.php:40— DependencyInjection/CachePoolPass.php changed 2 times in last 90 days, and the most complex body those changes touched has cyclomatic complexity 57 in CachePoolPass.process at line 40. 1 of those changes was a fix/bug commit, and the other 1 changed it for other reasons — this file is under both repair and feature pressure. Before the next change lands here, make sure the area it touches is under test, then split that area out of the file so the following change is smaller than this one — a file this often edited pays the complexity back every time. Counted over 2026-07-21..2026-10-19, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2026-07-21 19:23:11 +02:00' --until='2026-10-19 19:23:11 +02:00' --full-history --no-merges -- DependencyInjection/CachePoolPass.php`: merges are excluded because a merge re-states changes already counted at their own commits, and history is NOT path-simplified because a change that reached the file through a merged branch is still a change to it. That command counts raw commits and can read HIGHER than this row, which counts a cherry-picked re-land, and a revert together with the commit it undoes, once each — a difference of several commits on a file whose history was re-landed or reverted inside the window.
Duplicated block (8 lines × 2) Adapter/DoctrineDbalAdapter.php:202— Adapter/DoctrineDbalAdapter.php:202-209 | Traits/PdoTrait.php:152-159 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `Adapter/DoctrineDbalAdapter.php:202` it begins part-way through the construct above it, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that.
Duplicated block (8 lines × 2) Adapter/MemcachedAdapter.php:125— Adapter/MemcachedAdapter.php:125-132 | Traits/RedisTrait.php:134-141 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `Adapter/MemcachedAdapter.php:125` it does not close everything it opens, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that.
Duplicated block (8 lines × 2) Traits/RedisTrait.php:387— Traits/RedisTrait.php:387-394 | Traits/RedisTrait.php:434-441 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `Traits/RedisTrait.php:387` it does not close everything it opens, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that.
MethodTooLong: RedisTrait.createConnection Traits/RedisTrait.php:94— MethodTooLong — createConnection runs 289 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 189 over it, 2.89× the bar. This is length, not branching: a long straight-line body scores low on complexity and is still read whole to change any part of it, so the complexity numbers beside this row neither confirm nor excuse it. To reduce it, extract each cohesive step of the body — the runs of statements that work on the same values and would earn the same name — into its own named unit, and have this one call them in order.
MethodTooLong: CachePoolPass.process DependencyInjection/CachePoolPass.php:40— MethodTooLong — process runs 149 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 49 over it, 1.49× the bar. This is length, not branching: a long straight-line body scores low on complexity and is still read whole to change any part of it, so the complexity numbers beside this row neither confirm nor excuse it. To reduce it, extract each cohesive step of the body — the runs of statements that work on the same values and would earn the same name — into its own named unit, and have this one call them in order.
Duplicated block (9 lines × 2) Adapter/RedisTagAwareAdapter.php:110— Adapter/RedisTagAwareAdapter.php:110-118 | Traits/RedisTrait.php:604-612 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `Adapter/RedisTagAwareAdapter.php:110` it does not close everything it opens, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that.
Duplicated block (9 lines × 2) Adapter/TraceableAdapter.php:114— Adapter/TraceableAdapter.php:114-122 | Adapter/TraceableAdapter.php:253-261 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited. The matched lines also transfer control out of the body holding them, which cannot survive a move into a called unit unchanged: have the extracted unit return that decision and let each site act on it.
Duplicated block (7 lines × 2) Traits/PdoTrait.php:135— Traits/PdoTrait.php:135-141 | Traits/PdoTrait.php:160-166 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
Duplicated block (7 lines × 2) Adapter/RedisTagAwareAdapter.php:145— Adapter/RedisTagAwareAdapter.php:145-151 | Traits/RedisTrait.php:651-657 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice.
Duplicated block (6 lines × 2) Adapter/AbstractAdapter.php:201— Adapter/AbstractAdapter.php:201-206 | Adapter/AbstractTagAwareAdapter.php:224-229 — before extracting anything, compare `Adapter/AbstractAdapter.php` and `Adapter/AbstractTagAwareAdapter.php` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 6 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 64 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `Adapter/AbstractAdapter.php:201` it begins part-way through the construct above it, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that.
Duplicated block (6 lines × 2) Adapter/TagAwareAdapter.php:248— Adapter/TagAwareAdapter.php:248-253 | Traits/AbstractAdapterTrait.php:238-243 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice. The matched lines also transfer control out of the body holding them, which cannot survive a move into a called unit unchanged: have the extracted unit return that decision and let each site act on it.
Duplicated block (5 lines × 2) Adapter/DoctrineDbalAdapter.php:111— Adapter/DoctrineDbalAdapter.php:111-115 | Traits/PdoTrait.php:61-65 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice.
Duplicated block (5 lines × 2) Adapter/TagAwareAdapter.php:412— Adapter/TagAwareAdapter.php:412-416 | Psr16Cache.php:260-264 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice.
Swallowed exception (empty catch) Adapter/AbstractTagAwareAdapter.php:282— An empty catch block silently discards the error — failures vanish with no log and no rethrow. Log it, handle it, or don't catch it.
Swallowed exception (empty catch) Traits/AbstractAdapterTrait.php:165— An empty catch block silently discards the error — failures vanish with no log and no rethrow. Log it, handle it, or don't catch it.
RedisTrait.createConnection (cyclomatic 150) Traits/RedisTrait.php:94— RedisTrait.createConnection has cyclomatic complexity 150 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top. This file is where this pass's cyclomatic complexity CONCENTRATES: Traits/RedisTrait.php holds 3 of the 27 methods over the threshold — including the worst — and 168 of the 346 points over it (49%), 4× the next-largest file (DependencyInjection/CachePoolPass.php at 42). No single row can show this, because each is measured only against the threshold: reducing this one file moves this dimension further than any other file in the repository.
CachePoolPass.process (cyclomatic 57) DependencyInjection/CachePoolPass.php:40— CachePoolPass.process has cyclomatic complexity 57 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
MemcachedAdapter.createConnection (cyclomatic 40) Adapter/MemcachedAdapter.php:90— MemcachedAdapter.createConnection has cyclomatic complexity 40 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
RedisTrait.doClear (cyclomatic 35) Traits/RedisTrait.php:591— RedisTrait.doClear has cyclomatic complexity 35 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top. This file is where this pass's cyclomatic complexity CONCENTRATES: Traits/RedisTrait.php holds 3 of the 27 methods over the threshold — including the worst — and 168 of the 346 points over it (49%), 4× the next-largest file (DependencyInjection/CachePoolPass.php at 42). No single row can show this, because each is measured only against the threshold: reducing this one file moves this dimension further than any other file in the repository.
RedisTagAwareAdapter.prune (cyclomatic 31) Adapter/RedisTagAwareAdapter.php:93— RedisTagAwareAdapter.prune has cyclomatic complexity 31 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
CacheBundle.loadExtension (cyclomatic 30) CacheBundle.php:175— CacheBundle.loadExtension has cyclomatic complexity 30 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
RedisTrait.pipeline (cyclomatic 28) Traits/RedisTrait.php:753— RedisTrait.pipeline has cyclomatic complexity 28 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top. This file is where this pass's cyclomatic complexity CONCENTRATES: Traits/RedisTrait.php holds 3 of the 27 methods over the threshold — including the worst — and 168 of the 346 points over it (49%), 4× the next-largest file (DependencyInjection/CachePoolPass.php at 42). No single row can show this, because each is measured only against the threshold: reducing this one file moves this dimension further than any other file in the repository.
ArrayAdapter.save (cyclomatic 26) Adapter/ArrayAdapter.php:169— ArrayAdapter.save has cyclomatic complexity 26 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
LockRegistry.compute (cyclomatic 24) LockRegistry.php:94— LockRegistry.compute has cyclomatic complexity 24 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
PhpFilesAdapter.doFetch (cyclomatic 22) Adapter/PhpFilesAdapter.php:103— PhpFilesAdapter.doFetch has cyclomatic complexity 22 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
AbstractAdapter.commit (cyclomatic 21) Adapter/AbstractAdapter.php:171— AbstractAdapter.commit has cyclomatic complexity 21 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
AbstractTagAwareAdapter.commit (cyclomatic 20) Adapter/AbstractTagAwareAdapter.php:193— AbstractTagAwareAdapter.commit has cyclomatic complexity 20 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
DoctrineDbalAdapter.doSaveInner (cyclomatic 20) Adapter/DoctrineDbalAdapter.php:290— DoctrineDbalAdapter.doSaveInner has cyclomatic complexity 20 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the branches: extract each independent case into its own named function so the top-level body reads as a short sequence of named decisions.
RedisTagAwareAdapter.pruneTagSet (cyclomatic 20) Adapter/RedisTagAwareAdapter.php:422— RedisTagAwareAdapter.pruneTagSet has cyclomatic complexity 20 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
TagAwareAdapter.getItems (cyclomatic 20) Adapter/TagAwareAdapter.php:145— TagAwareAdapter.getItems has cyclomatic complexity 20 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
AbstractTagAwareAdapter.__construct (cyclomatic 19) Adapter/AbstractTagAwareAdapter.php:53— AbstractTagAwareAdapter.__construct has cyclomatic complexity 19 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
PhpArrayAdapter.warmUp (cyclomatic 19) Adapter/PhpArrayAdapter.php:251— PhpArrayAdapter.warmUp has cyclomatic complexity 19 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
PdoTrait.doSave (cyclomatic 19) Traits/PdoTrait.php:185— PdoTrait.doSave has cyclomatic complexity 19 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the branches: extract each independent case into its own named function so the top-level body reads as a short sequence of named decisions.
FilesystemTagAwareAdapter.doClear (cyclomatic 17) Adapter/FilesystemTagAwareAdapter.php:87— FilesystemTagAwareAdapter.doClear has cyclomatic complexity 17 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
PdoTagAwareAdapter.doSave (cyclomatic 17) Adapter/PdoTagAwareAdapter.php:119— PdoTagAwareAdapter.doSave has cyclomatic complexity 17 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the branches: extract each independent case into its own named function so the top-level body reads as a short sequence of named decisions.
RedisTagAwareAdapter.doSave (cyclomatic 17) Adapter/RedisTagAwareAdapter.php:173— RedisTagAwareAdapter.doSave has cyclomatic complexity 17 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
RedisTagAwareAdapter.doInvalidate (cyclomatic 17) Adapter/RedisTagAwareAdapter.php:277— RedisTagAwareAdapter.doInvalidate has cyclomatic complexity 17 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
CachePoolClearCommand.execute (cyclomatic 17) Command/CachePoolClearCommand.php:65— CachePoolClearCommand.execute has cyclomatic complexity 17 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
AbstractAdapterTrait.getId (cyclomatic 17) Traits/AbstractAdapterTrait.php:340— AbstractAdapterTrait.getId has cyclomatic complexity 17 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
PhpFilesAdapter.doSave (cyclomatic 16) Adapter/PhpFilesAdapter.php:220— PhpFilesAdapter.doSave has cyclomatic complexity 16 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
TagAwareAdapter.getTagVersions (cyclomatic 16) Adapter/TagAwareAdapter.php:349— TagAwareAdapter.getTagVersions has cyclomatic complexity 16 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
Psr16Cache.setMultiple (cyclomatic 16) Psr16Cache.php:170— Psr16Cache.setMultiple has cyclomatic complexity 16 (threshold 15). To reduce it, separate the cases: extract each independent branch into its own named function, and where the body has guards that only reject input, fold those into early returns at the top.
RedisTrait.createConnection (cognitive 228) Traits/RedisTrait.php:94— RedisTrait.createConnection has cognitive complexity 228 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 58 (113 pts), boolean chains 31, ternaries 13 (30 pts), loops 12 (23 pts), match/switch 10 (20 pts), error handling 5 (11 pts) (nesting depth added 99). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body. This file is where this pass's cognitive complexity CONCENTRATES: Traits/RedisTrait.php holds 4 of the 42 methods over the threshold — including the worst — and 310 of the 950 points over it (33%), 2.7× the next-largest file (DependencyInjection/CachePoolPass.php at 116). No single row can show this, because each is measured only against the threshold: reducing this one file moves this dimension further than any other file in the repository.
CachePoolPass.process (cognitive 131) DependencyInjection/CachePoolPass.php:40— CachePoolPass.process has cognitive complexity 131 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 37 (92 pts), loops 8 (17 pts), ternaries 4 (15 pts), boolean chains 7 (nesting depth added 75). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
RedisTrait.doClear (cognitive 79) Traits/RedisTrait.php:591— RedisTrait.doClear has cognitive complexity 79 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 13 (34 pts), ternaries 8 (21 pts), loops 6 (19 pts), boolean chains 5 (nesting depth added 47). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body. This file is where this pass's cognitive complexity CONCENTRATES: Traits/RedisTrait.php holds 4 of the 42 methods over the threshold — including the worst — and 310 of the 950 points over it (33%), 2.7× the next-largest file (DependencyInjection/CachePoolPass.php at 116). No single row can show this, because each is measured only against the threshold: reducing this one file moves this dimension further than any other file in the repository.
MemcachedAdapter.createConnection (cognitive 76) Adapter/MemcachedAdapter.php:90— MemcachedAdapter.createConnection has cognitive complexity 76 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 26 (53 pts), loops 5 (10 pts), boolean chains 8, ternaries 2 (5 pts) (nesting depth added 35). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
RedisTagAwareAdapter.prune (cognitive 64) Adapter/RedisTagAwareAdapter.php:93— RedisTagAwareAdapter.prune has cognitive complexity 64 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 9 (23 pts), ternaries 8 (21 pts), loops 6 (15 pts), boolean chains 5 (nesting depth added 36). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
RedisTagAwareAdapter.pruneTagSet (cognitive 49) Adapter/RedisTagAwareAdapter.php:422— RedisTagAwareAdapter.pruneTagSet has cognitive complexity 49 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 8 (23 pts), loops 8 (22 pts), boolean chains 2, ternaries 1 (2 pts) (nesting depth added 30). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
AbstractTagAwareAdapter.commit (cognitive 48) Adapter/AbstractTagAwareAdapter.php:193— AbstractTagAwareAdapter.commit has cognitive complexity 48 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: ternaries 6 (21 pts), loops 5 (10 pts), if/else 5 (9 pts), error handling 3 (7 pts), boolean chains 1 (nesting depth added 28). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
LockRegistry.compute (cognitive 48) LockRegistry.php:94— LockRegistry.compute has cognitive complexity 48 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 14 (35 pts), boolean chains 4, ternaries 2 (4 pts), loops 2 (3 pts), error handling 1 (2 pts) (nesting depth added 25). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
RedisTrait.pipeline (cognitive 47) Traits/RedisTrait.php:753— RedisTrait.pipeline has cognitive complexity 47 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: ternaries 8 (21 pts), loops 7 (13 pts), if/else 5 (7 pts), boolean chains 6 (nesting depth added 21). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body. This file is where this pass's cognitive complexity CONCENTRATES: Traits/RedisTrait.php holds 4 of the 42 methods over the threshold — including the worst — and 310 of the 950 points over it (33%), 2.7× the next-largest file (DependencyInjection/CachePoolPass.php at 116). No single row can show this, because each is measured only against the threshold: reducing this one file moves this dimension further than any other file in the repository.
AbstractAdapter.commit (cognitive 46) Adapter/AbstractAdapter.php:171— AbstractAdapter.commit has cognitive complexity 46 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: ternaries 5 (17 pts), loops 5 (10 pts), if/else 5 (9 pts), error handling 3 (7 pts), boolean chains 3 (nesting depth added 25). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
FilesystemTagAwareAdapter.prune (cognitive 43) Adapter/FilesystemTagAwareAdapter.php:45— FilesystemTagAwareAdapter.prune has cognitive complexity 43 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 5 (18 pts), ternaries 4 (13 pts), loops 4 (10 pts), boolean chains 2 (nesting depth added 28). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
FilesystemTagAwareAdapter.doClear (cognitive 42) Adapter/FilesystemTagAwareAdapter.php:87— FilesystemTagAwareAdapter.doClear has cognitive complexity 42 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 6 (16 pts), ternaries 4 (13 pts), loops 4 (10 pts), boolean chains 3 (nesting depth added 25). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
CacheBundle.loadExtension (cognitive 42) CacheBundle.php:175— CacheBundle.loadExtension has cognitive complexity 42 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 12 (23 pts), ternaries 4 (9 pts), boolean chains 5, loops 4 (5 pts) (nesting depth added 17). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
ArrayAdapter.save (cognitive 34) Adapter/ArrayAdapter.php:169— ArrayAdapter.save has cognitive complexity 34 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 12 (18 pts), boolean chains 8, ternaries 2 (4 pts), error handling 1 (2 pts), loops 1 (2 pts) (nesting depth added 10). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
TagAwareAdapter.getItems (cognitive 32) Adapter/TagAwareAdapter.php:145— TagAwareAdapter.getItems has cognitive complexity 32 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 8 (16 pts), loops 6 (8 pts), ternaries 1 (4 pts), boolean chains 3, error handling 1 (nesting depth added 13). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
PhpFilesAdapter.doFetch (cognitive 30) Adapter/PhpFilesAdapter.php:103— PhpFilesAdapter.doFetch has cognitive complexity 30 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 8 (20 pts), loops 3 (5 pts), error handling 1 (3 pts), boolean chains 2 (nesting depth added 16). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
PhpArrayAdapter.warmUp (cognitive 29) Adapter/PhpArrayAdapter.php:251— PhpArrayAdapter.warmUp has cognitive complexity 29 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 11 (20 pts), boolean chains 3, error handling 1 (3 pts), ternaries 1 (2 pts), loops 1 (nesting depth added 12). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
AbstractTagAwareAdapter.__construct (cognitive 28) Adapter/AbstractTagAwareAdapter.php:53— AbstractTagAwareAdapter.__construct has cognitive complexity 28 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 11 (17 pts), loops 3 (5 pts), ternaries 2 (4 pts), boolean chains 2 (nesting depth added 10). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
CacheDataCollector.calculateStatistics (cognitive 28) DataCollector/CacheDataCollector.php:95— CacheDataCollector.calculateStatistics has cognitive complexity 28 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 7 (16 pts), loops 3 (7 pts), ternaries 1 (5 pts) (nesting depth added 17). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
AbstractAdapterTrait.getId (cognitive 27) Traits/AbstractAdapterTrait.php:340— AbstractAdapterTrait.getId has cognitive complexity 27 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 9 (14 pts), ternaries 2 (6 pts), boolean chains 3, error handling 1 (2 pts), loops 1 (2 pts) (nesting depth added 11). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
RedisTagAwareAdapter.doInvalidate (cognitive 25) Adapter/RedisTagAwareAdapter.php:277— RedisTagAwareAdapter.doInvalidate has cognitive complexity 25 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 4 (7 pts), loops 4 (7 pts), ternaries 4 (7 pts), boolean chains 4 (nesting depth added 9). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
CachePoolClearCommand.execute (cognitive 25) Command/CachePoolClearCommand.php:65— CachePoolClearCommand.execute has cognitive complexity 25 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 11 (21 pts), loops 3, boolean chains 1 (nesting depth added 10). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
DoctrineDbalAdapter.doSaveInner (cognitive 22) Adapter/DoctrineDbalAdapter.php:290— DoctrineDbalAdapter.doSaveInner has cognitive complexity 22 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 5 (9 pts), error handling 3 (6 pts), boolean chains 4, loops 1, match/switch 1, ternaries 1 (nesting depth added 7). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
PdoTagAwareAdapter.doSave (cognitive 22) Adapter/PdoTagAwareAdapter.php:119— PdoTagAwareAdapter.doSave has cognitive complexity 22 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 3 (7 pts), error handling 2 (6 pts), loops 4 (6 pts), boolean chains 2, match/switch 1 (nesting depth added 10). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
Psr16Cache.setMultiple (cognitive 22) Psr16Cache.php:170— Psr16Cache.setMultiple has cognitive complexity 22 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 6 (10 pts), loops 4 (7 pts), boolean chains 3, error handling 2 (nesting depth added 7). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
RedisTagAwareAdapter.doSave (cognitive 21) Adapter/RedisTagAwareAdapter.php:173— RedisTagAwareAdapter.doSave has cognitive complexity 21 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 6 (10 pts), boolean chains 5, loops 4, ternaries 1 (2 pts) (nesting depth added 5). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
AbstractAdapterTrait.clear (cognitive 21) Traits/AbstractAdapterTrait.php:106— AbstractAdapterTrait.clear has cognitive complexity 21 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 5 (7 pts), ternaries 2 (6 pts), error handling 2 (3 pts), loops 1 (3 pts), boolean chains 2 (nesting depth added 9). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
FilesystemTagAwareAdapter.doDeleteYieldTags (cognitive 20) Adapter/FilesystemTagAwareAdapter.php:171— FilesystemTagAwareAdapter.doDeleteYieldTags has cognitive complexity 20 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 4 (9 pts), boolean chains 4, error handling 1 (3 pts), ternaries 1 (3 pts), loops 1 (nesting depth added 9). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
PhpFilesAdapter.doSave (cognitive 20) Adapter/PhpFilesAdapter.php:220— PhpFilesAdapter.doSave has cognitive complexity 20 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 7 (12 pts), boolean chains 3, error handling 1 (3 pts), loops 1, ternaries 1 (nesting depth added 7). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
TagAwareAdapter.getTagVersions (cognitive 20) Adapter/TagAwareAdapter.php:349— TagAwareAdapter.getTagVersions has cognitive complexity 20 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 7 (12 pts), loops 5 (6 pts), boolean chains 2 (nesting depth added 6). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
FilesystemCommonTrait.scanHashDir (cognitive 20) Traits/FilesystemCommonTrait.php:145— FilesystemCommonTrait.scanHashDir has cognitive complexity 20 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 4 (10 pts), loops 3 (6 pts), ternaries 1 (3 pts), boolean chains 1 (nesting depth added 11). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
MongoDbTagAwareAdapter.doSave (cognitive 19) Adapter/MongoDbTagAwareAdapter.php:49— MongoDbTagAwareAdapter.doSave has cognitive complexity 19 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 7 (13 pts), loops 4 (5 pts), boolean chains 1 (nesting depth added 7). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
RedisTagAwareAdapter.__construct (cognitive 19) Adapter/RedisTagAwareAdapter.php:65— RedisTagAwareAdapter.__construct has cognitive complexity 19 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: ternaries 3 (7 pts), boolean chains 5, if/else 3 (5 pts), loops 1 (2 pts) (nesting depth added 7). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
PdoTrait.doSave (cognitive 19) Traits/PdoTrait.php:185— PdoTrait.doSave has cognitive complexity 19 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 7 (9 pts), boolean chains 4, error handling 1 (3 pts), loops 1, match/switch 1, ternaries 1 (nesting depth added 4). To reduce it, split the body: most of this score is breadth rather than depth — checks laid out side by side rather than stacked — so group the statements between the checks into named steps and move each step into its own function. Some of it IS depth: where a check sits inside another whose only job is to reach it, merge the two into one condition, and where an else follows a branch that already returns, drop the trailing else and let the rest of the body continue at one level.
FilesystemTagAwareAdapter.doSave (cognitive 18) Adapter/FilesystemTagAwareAdapter.php:135— FilesystemTagAwareAdapter.doSave has cognitive complexity 18 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 3 (9 pts), loops 4 (6 pts), boolean chains 3 (nesting depth added 8). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
FilesystemTagAwareAdapter.doInvalidate (cognitive 18) Adapter/FilesystemTagAwareAdapter.php:219— FilesystemTagAwareAdapter.doInvalidate has cognitive complexity 18 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: loops 4 (8 pts), if/else 4 (7 pts), ternaries 1 (3 pts) (nesting depth added 9). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
AbstractTagAwareAdapter.deleteItems (cognitive 17) Adapter/AbstractTagAwareAdapter.php:253— AbstractTagAwareAdapter.deleteItems has cognitive complexity 17 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: loops 4 (5 pts), error handling 3 (4 pts), if/else 3 (4 pts), boolean chains 2, ternaries 1 (2 pts) (nesting depth added 4). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
TagAwareMarshaller.marshall (cognitive 17) Marshaller/TagAwareMarshaller.php:28— TagAwareMarshaller.marshall has cognitive complexity 17 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 6 (12 pts), boolean chains 4, loops 1 (nesting depth added 6). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
ArrayAdapter.generateItems (cognitive 16) Adapter/ArrayAdapter.php:341— ArrayAdapter.generateItems has cognitive complexity 16 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 4 (9 pts), ternaries 1 (3 pts), boolean chains 2, loops 2 (nesting depth added 7). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
CouchbaseCollectionAdapter.createConnection (cognitive 16) Adapter/CouchbaseCollectionAdapter.php:51— CouchbaseCollectionAdapter.createConnection has cognitive complexity 16 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 5 (7 pts), ternaries 3 (5 pts), loops 2 (4 pts) (nesting depth added 6). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
RedisTagAwareAdapter.getRedisEvictionPolicy (cognitive 16) Adapter/RedisTagAwareAdapter.php:376— RedisTagAwareAdapter.getRedisEvictionPolicy has cognitive complexity 16 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 6 (10 pts), boolean chains 3, ternaries 1 (2 pts), loops 1 (nesting depth added 5). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body.
RedisTrait.doDelete (cognitive 16) Traits/RedisTrait.php:691— RedisTrait.doDelete has cognitive complexity 16 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 5 (7 pts), error handling 1 (3 pts), boolean chains 2, loops 1 (2 pts), ternaries 1 (2 pts) (nesting depth added 6). To reduce it, split the body into named stages: move each independent step or branch into its own named function so the body reads as a short sequence of named calls rather than one long body. This file is where this pass's cognitive complexity CONCENTRATES: Traits/RedisTrait.php holds 4 of the 42 methods over the threshold — including the worst — and 310 of the 950 points over it (33%), 2.7× the next-largest file (DependencyInjection/CachePoolPass.php at 116). No single row can show this, because each is measured only against the threshold: reducing this one file moves this dimension further than any other file in the repository.
Change coupling: ArrayAdapter.php ↔ NullAdapter.php Adapter/ArrayAdapter.php:1— `Adapter/ArrayAdapter.php` and `Adapter/NullAdapter.php` change together 53% of the time (8 of the 15 commits that touched whichever of the two files changed less often, counting a file under its earlier names as well — a repo-wide or module-wide sweep is evidence about the sweep rather than about any pair inside it and is left out of BOTH sides of this ratio, while a dependency bump, a formatter/rename sweep, or a commit whose edit to one of the two files was a tool directive such as //go:generate or whitespace only is left out of the shared count ONLY, so the two sides are not taken over identical commit sets). They sit in the same directory, and in this ecosystem sibling files there normally share one namespace/package — so a direct reference between them needs no import and this pass cannot see whether one exists. Read the pair before acting: if one file only DECLARES what the other consumes (a constants/types file beside its user), the co-change is definitional and the question is whether the split earns its keep; if they duplicate structure, extract the common part into a shared function or type they both call; if neither holds, the coupling is hidden and worth breaking. You can check this without leaving the row: of the 8 shared commits counted here, the most recent 3 are `4fc61ec0` Mark callbacks with @param-immediately-invoked-callable where applicable; `af094f67` Use ??= more; `5123af38` [Cache] fix bad merge — run `git show` on any of them.
Near-duplicate member pair (32 shared lines) Adapter/AbstractAdapter.php:173— Adapter/AbstractAdapter.php:173-226 | Adapter/AbstractTagAwareAdapter.php:195-250 — These two members are variants of one another: 32 of their lines are already reported as duplicated blocks below, spread through both bodies rather than gathered into one. Read them as a single construct written twice. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared pipeline into one implementation the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (sync against async, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Extracting the individual blocks below is not the same fix: it leaves the two bodies in place and the next edit still has to be made twice.
D4 · Code Duplication· Edited copy of a member (21 corresponding lines) · ×1
Edited copy of a member (21 corresponding lines) Adapter/PhpArrayAdapter.php:253— Adapter/PhpArrayAdapter.php:253-336 | Adapter/PhpFilesAdapter.php:222-276 — These two members are one piece of code written twice and then edited apart: 21 consecutive lines correspond almost exactly, broken only by small local edits. Most of that correspondence is NOT reported as duplicated blocks below — the edits cut it into fragments and only the largest of them clear the block floor, so the rows below understate it. The repair is at the members' grain — factor the shared implementation into one the two call with their differences as parameters or as an injected step, or, where the difference is systematic (an extra return value, one transport against another), generate one from the other. Left alone, the next edit has to be made twice and the two will drift further apart.
Duplicated block (27 lines × 2) Adapter/PdoTagAwareAdapter.php:127— Adapter/PdoTagAwareAdapter.php:127-153 | Traits/PdoTrait.php:193-219 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `Adapter/PdoTagAwareAdapter.php:127` it does not close everything it opens, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that. The matched lines also transfer control out of the body holding them, which cannot survive a move into a called unit unchanged: have the extracted unit return that decision and let each site act on it.
Duplicated block (21 lines × 2) Adapter/AbstractAdapter.php:43— Adapter/AbstractAdapter.php:43-63 | Adapter/AbstractTagAwareAdapter.php:55-75 — before extracting anything, compare `Adapter/AbstractAdapter.php` and `Adapter/AbstractTagAwareAdapter.php` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 6 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 64 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `Adapter/AbstractAdapter.php:43` it does not close everything it opens, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that.
Duplicated block (20–21 lines × 2) Adapter/RedisTagAwareAdapter.php:125— Adapter/RedisTagAwareAdapter.php:125-144 | Traits/RedisTrait.php:622-642 — the copies span different directories, so extracting a shared function means choosing where it lives: put it somewhere both call sites can already reach — a location they all depend on today, or a new shared one if there is none — and call it from each site; until then, every change has to be made twice. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `Adapter/RedisTagAwareAdapter.php:125` it begins part-way through the construct above it, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that.
Duplicated block (16–17 lines × 2) Traits/RedisTrait.php:609— Traits/RedisTrait.php:609-625 | Traits/RedisTrait.php:673-688 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `Traits/RedisTrait.php:609` it begins part-way through the construct above it, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that.
Duplicated block (16 lines × 2) Adapter/PdoTagAwareAdapter.php:163— Adapter/PdoTagAwareAdapter.php:163-178 | Adapter/PdoTagAwareAdapter.php:188-203 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `Adapter/PdoTagAwareAdapter.php:163` it begins part-way through the construct above it, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that.
Duplicated block (14–15 lines × 3) Adapter/RedisTagAwareAdapter.php:131— Adapter/RedisTagAwareAdapter.php:131-144 | Adapter/RedisTagAwareAdapter.php:382-396 | Traits/RedisTrait.php:628-642 — there are 3 copies across 2 file(s) — more copies than files, so at least one file holds the block twice. Extract it once into a single shared function every call site can reach and call it from all 3 sites; resolving a subset leaves the remainder to drift apart. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `Adapter/RedisTagAwareAdapter.php:131` it does not close everything it opens, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that.
Duplicated block (12–13 lines × 2) Adapter/AbstractAdapter.php:175— Adapter/AbstractAdapter.php:175-186 | Adapter/AbstractTagAwareAdapter.php:197-209 — before extracting anything, compare `Adapter/AbstractAdapter.php` and `Adapter/AbstractTagAwareAdapter.php` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 6 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 64 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `Adapter/AbstractAdapter.php:175` it does not close everything it opens, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that.
Duplicated block (8–9 lines × 3) Adapter/FilesystemTagAwareAdapter.php:56— Adapter/FilesystemTagAwareAdapter.php:56-63 | Adapter/FilesystemTagAwareAdapter.php:109-116 | Traits/FilesystemCommonTrait.php:153-161 — there are 3 copies across 2 file(s) — more copies than files, so at least one file holds the block twice. Extract it once into a single shared function every call site can reach and call it from all 3 sites; resolving a subset leaves the remainder to drift apart. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `Adapter/FilesystemTagAwareAdapter.php:56` it does not close everything it opens, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that. The matched lines also transfer control out of the body holding them, which cannot survive a move into a called unit unchanged: have the extracted unit return that decision and let each site act on it.
Duplicated block (7–9 lines × 2) Adapter/CouchbaseCollectionAdapter.php:53— Adapter/CouchbaseCollectionAdapter.php:53-61 | Adapter/MemcachedAdapter.php:92-98 — the copies sit in sibling files of one directory, so a shared home is within easy reach: extract the block into a single shared function the call sites can all reach — a file they already depend on, or a new one alongside them — and call it from both call sites, so a change lands once.
Duplicated block (7 lines × 3) Traits/RedisTrait.php:365— Traits/RedisTrait.php:365-371 | Traits/RedisTrait.php:386-392 | Traits/RedisTrait.php:433-439 — all 3 copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from every one of those sites — resolving only two of them leaves the rest to drift apart the first time one is edited. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `Traits/RedisTrait.php:365` it does not close everything it opens, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that.
Duplicated block (1–5 lines × 4) Adapter/AbstractAdapter.php:197— Adapter/AbstractAdapter.php:197-198 | Adapter/AbstractAdapter.php:217-221 | Adapter/AbstractTagAwareAdapter.php:221-221 | Adapter/AbstractTagAwareAdapter.php:241-245 — before extracting anything, compare `Adapter/AbstractAdapter.php` and `Adapter/AbstractTagAwareAdapter.php` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 6 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 64 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `Adapter/AbstractAdapter.php:217` it begins part-way through the construct above it, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that.
Duplicated block (2–5 lines × 4) Adapter/AbstractAdapter.php:199— Adapter/AbstractAdapter.php:199-200 | Adapter/AbstractAdapter.php:222-226 | Adapter/AbstractTagAwareAdapter.php:222-223 | Adapter/AbstractTagAwareAdapter.php:246-250 — before extracting anything, compare `Adapter/AbstractAdapter.php` and `Adapter/AbstractTagAwareAdapter.php` as WHOLE FILES: this scan already matched 6 separate duplicated blocks between them, totalling at least 64 lines, which is the signature of one file having been copied from the other rather than of a helper waiting to be extracted. If that is what happened, the fix is to keep one copy and have the other call it (or delete it), which resolves this row and its siblings together — extracting one helper per block leaves the fork in place. Read the line range as the matched WINDOW rather than a finished unit: at `Adapter/AbstractAdapter.php:199` it begins part-way through the construct above it, so those exact lines cannot be lifted as they stand — widen the region to the smallest complete statement or declaration that contains it, and extract that. Note that the copies do not run to the end of the range shown: their LAST lines are different code, not the same code under different names — the matched region ends inside that line. Extract the lines above it, and read the last line of each site separately.
Duplicated predicate Adapter/PdoTagAwareAdapter.php:150— `'pgsql' === $driver && version_compare($this->getServerVersion(), '9.5', '>=')` appears character-identically in 2 files — Adapter/PdoTagAwareAdapter.php, Traits/PdoTrait.php. It is one line, so the duplication detector's token window never sees it; the copies drift when only one is corrected. Give the condition a name and one home.
Duplicated predicate Adapter/PdoTagAwareAdapter.php:140— `'sqlsrv' === $driver && version_compare($this->getServerVersion(), '10', '>=')` appears character-identically in 2 files — Adapter/PdoTagAwareAdapter.php, Traits/PdoTrait.php. It is one line, so the duplication detector's token window never sees it; the copies drift when only one is corrected. Give the condition a name and one home.
Duplicated predicate Adapter/DoctrineDbalAdapter.php:82— `isset($namespace[0]) && preg_match('#[^-+.A-Za-z0-9]#', $namespace, $match)` appears character-identically in 2 files — Adapter/DoctrineDbalAdapter.php, Traits/PdoTrait.php. It is one line, so the duplication detector's token window never sees it; the copies drift when only one is corrected. Give the condition a name and one home.
Duplicated predicate Adapter/TagAwareAdapter.php:310— `pool instanceof PruneableInterface && $this` appears character-identically in 2 files — Adapter/TagAwareAdapter.php, Traits/ProxyTrait.php. It is one line, so the duplication detector's token window never sees it; the copies drift when only one is corrected. Give the condition a name and one home.
Duplicated predicate Adapter/DoctrineDbalAdapter.php:400— `str_contains($key, "\0") || str_contains($key, '%') || !preg_match('//u', $key)` appears character-identically in 2 files — Adapter/DoctrineDbalAdapter.php, Traits/PdoTrait.php. It is one line, so the duplication detector's token window never sees it; the copies drift when only one is corrected. Give the condition a name and one home.
Duplicated predicate Adapter/RedisTagAwareAdapter.php:216— `true !== $result && (!$result instanceof Status || Status::get('OK') !== $result)` appears character-identically in 2 files — Adapter/RedisTagAwareAdapter.php, Traits/RedisTrait.php. It is one line, so the duplication detector's token window never sees it; the copies drift when only one is corrected. Give the condition a name and one home.
Documentation: no installation or build instructions README.md— The document says nothing about how to install or build the component. Add installation (composer require and any optional dependencies) and a minimal usage example.
Documentation: no usage examples README.md— There is no 'how to run it' section, so readers cannot determine how to invoke the Cache component. Describe one or two concrete commands showing how to add caching with an adapter.
Documentation: no contributor guidance README.md— The Resources link points to Symfony's main repository but there is no guidance for contributors about this package. Add a short contributing doc (PR process, test requirements) for the component.
Orphaned file Traits/RedisCluster63ProxyTrait.php:1— No one still active in this repository holds living knowledge of this file: everyone who made a meaningful change to it has gone quiet, or what the current team did to it (moves, reformatting, log-level or import edits, renames) never needed understanding it. If it breaks, no one currently understands it. Attach the read to the next change that touches it: have a second person review that change, and leave behind a short comment or test recording what the file is for.
Orphaned file Traits/Redis63ProxyTrait.php:1— No one still active in this repository holds living knowledge of this file: everyone who made a meaningful change to it has gone quiet, or what the current team did to it (moves, reformatting, log-level or import edits, renames) never needed understanding it. If it breaks, no one currently understands it. Attach the read to the next change that touches it: have a second person review that change, and leave behind a short comment or test recording what the file is for.
Off-boarding risk: anonymized user #1 — If anonymized user #1 becomes unavailable, 12 significant file(s) lose their only recent owner: Traits/RedisProxy.php, CacheBundle.php, Traits/AbstractAdapterTrait.php, Resources/config/cache.php, Adapter/ProxyAdapter.php, Adapter/CouchbaseCollectionAdapter.php, Traits/Relay/RelayCluster40Trait.php, Traits/ContractsTrait.php (+4 more). Pair on, review, or document these before any departure.
D16 · Bus Factor· Further sole-owners (lower concentration) · ×1
Further sole-owners (lower concentration) — 1 other contributor(s) are each the sole owner of a small amount of code below the off-boarding threshold — folded into the bus-factor score and metrics (13 single-owned of 51 analysed files in total, counted over production source files of roughly 2,400 bytes or more, excluding vendored, generated and example/demo trees and test files identified by path convention, largest first; 51 of the 92 production source files in this repository met that bar). They are anonymized user #2 (1 file(s)) — spread or document their files in the same way, at lower priority than the named off-boarding risks above. The files folded here: Adapter/PdoTagAwareAdapter.php.
D34 · Knowledge Freshness· Orphaned files with no living knowledge · ×1
Orphaned files with no living knowledge — 2 of 51 analysed file(s) have no living knowledge left — their last meaningful change has decayed away, so if one breaks, no one currently understands it (counted over production source files of roughly 2,400 bytes or more, excluding vendored, generated and example/demo trees and test files identified by path convention, largest first; 51 of the 92 production source files in this repository met that bar). None is large enough to earn a read-through of its own, so this row stands in for the per-file rows rather than raising one each — most significant first: Traits/RedisCluster63ProxyTrait.php, Traits/Redis63ProxyTrait.php. Attach the read to the next change that touches one of them: have a second person review that change, and leave behind a short comment or test recording what the file is for, so the knowledge comes back at the cost of a change you were making anyway.
Thin README — The root README is 92 words, against a bar of 120. Of the three newcomer-critical sections this check looks for by heading, it found no a build/run or getting-started section, no a testing section, no an architecture or project-map section. Sections are matched on HEADING text only, so material written under a heading this check does not recognise — or with no heading at all — is not seen and this row may understate what the document covers.
No ADRs — No Architecture Decision Records found — no conventional ADR directory, no numbered `NNNN-title` documents in any markup this check reads, and nothing ADR-shaped by content. Design rationale recorded elsewhere (a design-notes tree, a mailing list, pull-request discussion) is not visible to this check and is not re-findable per decision, so a future maintainer cannot ask why one choice was made and get an answer.
M2 · Architecture documentation· No architecture diagram/doc · ×1
No architecture diagram/doc — No C4/Structurizr/PlantUML/Mermaid/Graphviz/D2 diagram, no drawn diagram named for the architecture, no file named `architecture` or `design` in any markup this check reads, and nothing in the README, docs or contributor guides that announces the shape — no `## Architecture` heading, no "architecture overview"/"high-level design" phrasing, no "the architecture is …" introduction, no guided code tour. A shape laid out in prose that never names itself as the architecture is not visible to this check, and neither is one kept outside the repository, so this row reports the absence of a re-findable shape document — not evidence that nobody wrote the shape down.
No src/ separation — Production code isn't grouped under a src/ folder — it's spread across several top-level directories, so there's no one place that says 'this is the product'.
No SAST — No static application security testing detected. For this repository's stack, add phpstan or psalm (or `semgrep --config=auto`, which runs on any language) — this repository has no CI pipeline yet, so run it locally to clear the existing findings, then make it a step of the first workflow you add so a regression fails the build. What was searched, so you can tell an absence from a miss: the 0 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.
X5 · Nullable reference types· PHP static analysis does not check null everywhere · ×1
PHP static analysis does not check null everywhere — This repository commits no PHPStan or Psalm configuration (`phpstan.neon[.dist]`, `phpstan.dist.neon`, `psalm.xml[.dist]`, or one a composer.json script names with `--configuration`), so nothing checks null: a `?Customer` reaches `->name()` silently and throws `Error: Call to a member function name() on null` the first time it is null. If the build passes a level on a command line instead, put it in a committed configuration — this check reads configuration, and configuration is all it can read.
Skipped (documented): testWritableDirectoryWithOpcacheUsesPhpFilesAdapterAlone Tests/Adapter/AbstractAdapterCreateSystemCacheTest.php:43— Skipped with a documented reason — a deferral, not lazy debt: skipped at run time by markTestSkipped()
Skipped (documented): testWithoutApcuUsesPhpFilesAdapterAlone Tests/Adapter/AbstractAdapterCreateSystemCacheTest.php:52— Skipped with a documented reason — a deferral, not lazy debt: skipped at run time by markTestSkipped()
Skipped (documented): testCreateConnectionReturnsConfiguredCollection Tests/Adapter/MongoDbAdapterDsnTest.php:114— Skipped with a documented reason — a deferral, not lazy debt: skipped at run time by markTestSkipped()
Skipped (documented): testFiles Tests/LockRegistryTest.php:23— Skipped with a documented reason — a deferral, not lazy debt: skipped at run time by markTestSkipped()
Skipped (documented): testComputeReportsFailedSaves Tests/LockRegistryTest.php:53— Skipped with a documented reason — a deferral, not lazy debt: skipped at run time by markTestSkipped()
Skipped (documented): testEvictingASlotKeepsTheHandlesOfTheOtherSlotsOpen Tests/LockRegistryTest.php:103— Skipped with a documented reason — a deferral, not lazy debt: skipped at run time by markTestSkipped()
Skipped (documented): testIgbinarySerialize Tests/Marshaller/DefaultMarshallerTest.php:34— Skipped with a documented reason — a deferral, not lazy debt: skipped at run time by markTestSkipped()
Skipped (documented): testIgbinaryUnserialize Tests/Marshaller/DefaultMarshallerTest.php:61— Skipped with a documented reason — a deferral, not lazy debt: skipped at run time by markTestSkipped()
Skipped (documented): testIgbinaryUnserializeNotFoundClass Tests/Marshaller/DefaultMarshallerTest.php:82— Skipped with a documented reason — a deferral, not lazy debt: skipped at run time by markTestSkipped()
Skipped (documented): testIgbinaryUnserializeInvalid Tests/Marshaller/DefaultMarshallerTest.php:108— Skipped with a documented reason — a deferral, not lazy debt: skipped at run time by markTestSkipped()
Skipped (documented): testCreateConnection Tests/Traits/RedisTraitTest.php:34— Skipped with a documented reason — a deferral, not lazy debt: skipped at run time by markTestSkipped()
Skipped (documented): testUrlDecodeParameters Tests/Traits/RedisTraitTest.php:51— Skipped with a documented reason — a deferral, not lazy debt: skipped at run time by markTestSkipped()
Skipped (documented): testPconnectSelectsCorrectDatabase Tests/Traits/RedisTraitTest.php:97— Skipped with a documented reason — a deferral, not lazy debt: skipped at run time by markTestSkipped()
Skipped (documented): testDbIndexDsnParameter Tests/Traits/RedisTraitTest.php:139— Skipped with a documented reason — a deferral, not lazy debt: skipped at run time by markTestSkipped()
Skipped (documented): testInvalidDbIndexDsnParameter Tests/Traits/RedisTraitTest.php:183— Skipped with a documented reason — a deferral, not lazy debt: skipped at run time by markTestSkipped()
No assertions (declared): testTaggable Tests/Adapter/NullAdapterTest.php:141— This test performs no assertions and its author said so, with the test framework's own declaration for exactly that (PHPUnit `#[DoesNotPerformAssertions]`, which switches off PHPUnit's "This test did not perform any assertions" warning). It is reported for visibility and is NOT counted against this dimension's score: D10 looks for tests that verify nothing unintentionally. Worth a read anyway — such a test passes as long as the code under it does not throw, so if it was meant to check something, the declaration is now hiding that it does not.
Appendix B — Reproduction & audit trail
Every external tool invocation behind a deep-scan dimension — the tool, its captured version, the exact command, how many findings it yielded, and a link to the retained raw output. To reproduce any finding: check out the same commit and run the command shown (repo-relative — never an absolute scratch path). The complete raw scanner output is retained verbatim under artifacts/raw/ (indexed in artifacts/raw/index.json); per-invocation exit codes and wall-clock durations are in sidecar.json — kept out of this table so the rendered report stays byte-identical across runs of the same commit.
none (dependency manifest found, not scanned for vulnerabilities here)
—
none (dependency manifest found, not scanned for vulnerabilities here): not applicable — Not scored — no dependency manifest in a supported ecosystem was read for this repository. A gap in the analyzer's language coverage, NOT a finding that the repository is free of vulnerable dependencies (composer.json — not scanned yet).
trivy: not applicable — No Infrastructure-as-Code or container manifests found (Dockerfile, Docker Compose, Terraform, Kubernetes/Helm, CloudFormation, ARM, Bicep, Ansible); nothing to scan.
semgrep: not applicable — No personal data was found crossing a boundary the PII/GDPR ruleset checks — nothing written to a log or console sink, placed in a URL or query string, or persisted to browser storage. That is a clean result for the LEAK surface only: this ruleset detects personal data escaping, it does not inventory the personal data a repository holds, so it is not evidence that this repository has no personal-data surface. The personal-data map (Appendix C) and the C1-C5 compliance cards are what speak to that. semgrep could not parse 10 file(s) — `Adapter/AbstractAdapter.php`, `Adapter/AbstractTagAwareAdapter.php`, `Adapter/DoctrineDbalAdapter.php`, `Adapter/TraceableAdapter.php`, `CacheBundle.php`, … (+5 more) — so the PII/GDPR sweep did not cover the unparsed regions of them; rows reported elsewhere in those files are real.
provenance: not applicable — No CI/build pipeline found (.github/.forgejo/.gitea workflows, .circleci, .buildkite, .woodpecker, .teamcity, .gitlab-ci.yml, .travis.yml, bitbucket-pipelines.yml, .drone.yml, .cirrus.yml, .woodpecker.yml, appveyor.yml, azure-pipelines*.yml, .pipelines/, .vsts-ci/, .azuredevops/, Jenkinsfile); there is no build to attest provenance for.
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.
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.
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.
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.
none (dependency manifest found, not scanned for vulnerabilities here)
—
none (dependency manifest found, not scanned for vulnerabilities here): not applicable — Not scored — no dependency manifest in a supported ecosystem was read for this repository. A gap in the analyzer's language coverage, NOT a finding that the repository is free of vulnerable dependencies (composer.json — not scanned yet).
0
—
Run 01a15b81-bdcf-7cc7-9748-fc06ce3f1e46 · every finding is also locatable in findings.md, and the complete scoring record (with exit codes + durations) in sidecar.json.
Warnings: 125 · Recommendations: 20 · Info: 16 — Appendix A · all findings · full markdown report.
Generated by Watchdog — deterministic code-health analysis. 20-10-2026 @ 22:49 UTC.
Downloadable artifacts
Machine-readable and reproducible from this commit + frozen rubric — drop them straight into a contract appendix, a CRA dossier, or a downstream SCA / VEX tool.