Public report of thaitype/thaitype-stack-postgresql-template, published 22 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 report Measured 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, 22 October 2026, 15:36 UTC · Survey ID cd_9fbe18ed733040769826bf5e3c354e3f

thaitype/thaitype-stack-postgresql-template

Measured 22 October 2026, 15:34 UTC, at code version 38d4f10

Code coverage: not measuredTest distribution: not measured

Code coverage is not measured: Tests deferred to the consumer.

Test distribution is not measured: No automated tests.

CAI score 34out of 100 At risk No change 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.

Domain Modelling 100 Exemplary Performance 100 Exemplary Architecture 76 Adequate Code Health 66 Adequate Maturity 61 Adequate Security and Compliance 29 Weak Production Readiness 14 Weak

A small codebase: 7,876 lines of product code in 1 project, tests not counted · Estimated rebuild effort: about 0.1 person-years · Weakest lens: Production Readiness, 14

Findings by how serious they are

25 critical 99 serious 82 minor

9 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
22 October 2026, 15:34 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.

A critical security finding is open, such as a library with a known critical vulnerability or a password or key found in the code. The score itself is unchanged, but its band shows At risk until the finding is fixed. See the Security and Compliance lens.

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 ▸

66of 69 dimensions measured by tools. The other 3 are advisory notes from an AI model, which explain the code but don't count towards the score.
167of 206 findings point to an exact file and line, so you can open each one in the code. The other 39 concern the repository as a whole, such as missing documentation.
69dimensions across 7 lenses, read from 7,876 lines of product code in 1 project.
Chapters

Executive summary

thaitype/thaitype-stack-postgresql-template scores 34 out of 100, but it is rated At risk while a critical security finding is open; the score itself is unchanged. Watchdog judged it as a template, sample or demo, meant to be read or copied, so the dimensions about building, releasing and running a product don't apply, and its lenses are rated against a lower bar. The score itself is worked out as for any repository.

The weakest lens counts most in the score, and here that is Production Readiness, which scores 14 and is rated Weak. Its Test Distribution dimension scores 0 out of 10, and until that reaches 4, Production Readiness can't be rated higher than Adequate. The first actions are to resolve the 1 No tests found finding(s) in Test Distribution and to resolve the 2 Deprecated finding(s) in Dependency Hygiene, and if Production Readiness rose to 70, the score would rise from 34 to about 50.

25 findings are critical: 23 in Dependency Vulnerabilities, one in IaC & Container Security and one in Static Analysis (SAST).

Watchdog couldn't measure 5 dimensions in this code, among them Navigability, Web-Security Posture and Cancellation propagation, so they are left out of the score. The product code is 7,876 lines, which would take an estimated 0.1 person-years, around €6,000, to rebuild.

Code Health 66 Adequate, capped by Dead Code Architecture 76 Adequate, capped by Project Cohesion Maturity 61 Adequate, capped by Architecture documentation Production Readiness 14 Weak, capped by Test Distribution, Test Coverage, CI/CD gates, Security & performance tooling and DR & Backup Security and Compliance 29 Weak, capped by Dependency Vulnerabilities, Data Protection and Access Controls Domain Modelling 100 ★ Exemplary Performance 100 ★ Exemplary

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

How the score is built: what each lens counts for The lenses don't count equally. The weakest lens counts most, the next weakest a little less, and so on, so a weak area pulls the score down instead of being averaged away. In the bar below, each part's width shows how much that lens counts and its colour shows its rating. Improving the widest part moves the score most, and as that lens improves, it counts for less, because another lens becomes the weakest.
Production Readiness 14 · counts for 46%Security and Compliance 29 · counts for 25%Maturity 61 · counts for 14%Code Health 66 · counts for 8%Architecture 76 · counts for 4%Domain Modelling 100 · counts for 2%Performance 100 · counts for 1%

If Production Readiness rose from 14 to 70, the lowest score rated Strong, the score would rise from 34 to about 50.

Code composition: what the lines of code are
Product code 100%
New since the last survey: 11 findings

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

Watchdog compares every finding with the previous survey's. A finding that has only moved to another line in the same file counts as the same finding, so only new findings appear here. Advisory notes from the AI model are left out, because the model words them afresh in every survey.

Fixed since the last survey: 2 findings

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

  • Code Duplication · Duplicated block (6 lines × 3 locations) src/server/schemas/user.ts
  • Code Duplication · Duplicated block (5 lines × 2 locations) src/server/domain/repositories/schemas/user-repository-schemas.ts
Rebuild cost: about €6,000 · Estimate
Cost to rebuild€2,000 to €10,000, for 33 to 106 hours of work, about 0.1 person-years for one engineer
Difficulty of the problemLow, 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 34. 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.
SizeSmall: 7,876 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 1 No tests found finding(s) in Test Distribution.
Raises the score by about 18 points · Low effort · Test Distribution
2
Resolve the 2 Deprecated finding(s) in Dependency Hygiene — start with package.json (2).
Raises the score by about 5 points · Low effort · Dependency Hygiene
3
Encrypt sensitive data at rest (AES-256-GCM through node:crypto createCipheriv, or a column-encryption layer such as typeorm-encrypted / prisma-field-encryption / MongoDB CSFLE) and manage keys in a vault (AWS KMS, Azure Key Vault, GCP KMS, HashiCorp Vault).
Skip if delegated to infra (Postgres TDE, KMS, etc.).
Raises the score by about 8 points · Medium effort · Data Protection

Diagnosis: what the measurements show together

Each conclusion below combines several dimensions into one point that no single dimension shows, and lists the measurements it rests on.

Where the investment is most exposed · Value at risk
This code would cost about €6,000 to build again, about 0.1 person-years of work. Its weakest lens is Production Readiness, at 14 (Critical). Production Readiness is about whether the product is ready to run in production and to change without breaking. Because the weakest lens counts most in the score, work on Production Readiness also moves the score most.
Based on: the rebuild estimate · the Production Readiness grade · how much each lens counts
What to do: Start with the Production Readiness actions in Top priorities.
If you do one thing first · First action
Resolve the 1 No tests found finding(s) in Test Distribution. Of all the actions in this report, it raises the score most for the work it takes: about 18 points for low effort, because it clears the 1 Test Distribution findings. The next survey will show the change in the score.
Based on: the ranked actions in Top priorities, by score gain and effort

Architecture: which parts of the code depend on which

The code is divided into modules, groups of code that each handle one part of the product, and a module depends on another when it uses code from it. The table lists the modules both down the side and across the top, in an order where each module should only use modules listed above it. A number in a cell means the module on that row uses the module in that column, and it counts the pairs of building blocks (types) that connect them. The one thing to look for is a mark above the diagonal line. It means two or more modules use each other in a loop (a dependency cycle), so none of them can be changed, tested or released on its own.

59 modules, with 44 dependencies between them. One loop runs through 3 of the modules, marked above the diagonal.

The table shows the 40 modules with the most connections; 19 more are left out to keep it readable.

Which modules use which. The module on each row uses the module in each column, and the number counts the pairs of types that connect them. A cell above the diagonal is part of a loop.
uses →1 src2 src.app.ClientProviders3 src.app._components.AddTodoForm4 src.app._components.TodoItem5 src.app._components.TodoList6 src.app.api.auth.[___all]7 src.app.api.trpc.[trpc]8 src.app.login9 src.app.profile10 src.components.auth.AuthModal11 src.components.auth.LoginForm12 src.components.auth.ProtectedRoute13 src.components.auth.RegisterForm14 src.server.config.types15 src.server.domain.models.user16 src.server.domain.repositories.types.role-repository-types17 src.server.domain.repositories.types.todo-repository-types18 src.server.domain.repositories.types.user-repository-types19 src.server.infrastructure.db.schema.role20 src.server.infrastructure.repositories.base-drizzle-repository21 src.server.utils.retry22 src.app23 src.app._components24 src.components.auth25 src.server.config26 src.server.domain.repositories.role-repository27 src.server.domain.repositories.todo-repository28 src.server.domain.repositories.user-repository29 src.server.lib30 src.server.types.auth-types31 src.server.utils32 src.server.services.todo-service33 src.server.services.user-service34 src.server.context.app-context35 src.server.context36 src.server.infrastructure.logging37 src.server.infrastructure.repositories.drizzle-role-repository38 src.server.infrastructure.repositories.drizzle-todo-repository39 src.server.infrastructure.repositories.drizzle-user-repository40 src.server.lib.error-handlers
1 src
2 src.app.ClientProviders
3 src.app._components.AddTodoForm
4 src.app._components.TodoItem
5 src.app._components.TodoList
6 src.app.api.auth.[___all]
7 src.app.api.trpc.[trpc]
8 src.app.login
9 src.app.profile
10 src.components.auth.AuthModal
11 src.components.auth.LoginForm
12 src.components.auth.ProtectedRoute
13 src.components.auth.RegisterForm
14 src.server.config.types
15 src.server.domain.models.user
16 src.server.domain.repositories.types.role-repository-types
17 src.server.domain.repositories.types.todo-repository-types
18 src.server.domain.repositories.types.user-repository-types
19 src.server.infrastructure.db.schema.role
20 src.server.infrastructure.repositories.base-drizzle-repository
21 src.server.utils.retry
22 src.app1
23 src.app._components11
24 src.components.auth1111
25 src.server.config1
26 src.server.domain.repositories.role-repository11
27 src.server.domain.repositories.todo-repository11
28 src.server.domain.repositories.user-repository12
29 src.server.lib1
30 src.server.types.auth-types3
31 src.server.utils2
32 src.server.services.todo-service111
33 src.server.services.user-service811
34 src.server.context.app-context111
35 src.server.context1
36 src.server.infrastructure.logging1
37 src.server.infrastructure.repositories.drizzle-role-repository11111
38 src.server.infrastructure.repositories.drizzle-todo-repository11111
39 src.server.infrastructure.repositories.drizzle-user-repository12111
40 src.server.lib.error-handlers1
Uses a module listed above itPart of a loopThe module itself
1 src2 src.app.ClientProviders3 src.app._components.AddTodoForm4 src.app._components.TodoItem5 src.app._components.TodoList6 src.app.api.auth.[___all]7 src.app.api.trpc.[trpc]8 src.app.login9 src.app.profile10 src.components.auth.AuthModal11 src.components.auth.LoginForm12 src.components.auth.ProtectedRoute13 src.components.auth.RegisterForm14 src.server.config.types15 src.server.domain.models.user16 src.server.domain.repositories.types.role-repository-types17 src.server.domain.repositories.types.todo-repository-types18 src.server.domain.repositories.types.user-repository-types19 src.server.infrastructure.db.schema.role20 src.server.infrastructure.repositories.base-drizzle-repository21 src.server.utils.retry22 src.app23 src.app._components24 src.components.auth25 src.server.config26 src.server.domain.repositories.role-repository27 src.server.domain.repositories.todo-repository28 src.server.domain.repositories.user-repository29 src.server.lib30 src.server.types.auth-types31 src.server.utils32 src.server.services.todo-service33 src.server.services.user-service34 src.server.context.app-context35 src.server.context36 src.server.infrastructure.logging37 src.server.infrastructure.repositories.drizzle-role-repository38 src.server.infrastructure.repositories.drizzle-todo-repository39 src.server.infrastructure.repositories.drizzle-user-repository40 src.server.lib.error-handlerssrc1src.app.ClientProviders2src.app._components.AddTodoForm3src.app._components.TodoItem4src.app._components.TodoList5src.app.api.auth.[___all]6src.app.api.trpc.[trpc]7src.app.login8src.app.profile9src.components.auth.AuthModal10src.components.auth.LoginForm11src.components.auth.ProtectedRoute12src.components.auth.RegisterForm13src.server.config.types14src.server.domain.models.user15src.server.domain.repositories.types.role-repository-types16src.server.domain.repositories.types.todo-repository-types17src.server.domain.repositories.types.user-repository-types18src.server.infrastructure.db.schema.role19src.server.infrastructure.repositories.base-drizzle-repository20src.server.utils.retry21src.app22src.app._components23src.components.auth24src.server.config25src.server.domain.repositories.role-repository26src.server.domain.repositories.todo-repository27src.server.domain.repositories.user-repository28src.server.lib29src.server.types.auth-types30src.server.utils31src.server.services.todo-service32src.server.services.user-service33src.server.context.app-context34src.server.context35src.server.infrastructure.logging36src.server.infrastructure.repositories.drizzle-role-repository37src.server.infrastructure.repositories.drizzle-todo-repository38src.server.infrastructure.repositories.drizzle-user-repository39src.server.lib.error-handlers4011111111111112132111811111111111111111121111+19 more modules (most-connected shown)

At a glance — Code Health · 66% · Adequate · gated by R7 ·

The Good
D1 · TypeScript Cyclomatic Complexity 9.8 D2 · TypeScript Cognitive Complexity 9.7 D3 · TypeScript God Classes 6.5 D17 · TypeScript Explicit Debt 9.8 GD1 · Repo Unfinished & placeholder code 10.0 IC1 · Repo Incompleteness & stubs 10.0 R1 · React / TS Type Safety 10.0 R10 · React / TS Code Duplication 7.6 R2 · React / TS Cyclomatic Complexity 9.0 R3 · React / TS Large Files 8.4 X1 · Repo Async correctness 10.0 X12 · Repo Unreachable branch 10.0 X13 · Repo Undrained process stream 10.0 X16 · Repo Unfloored truncation loop 10.0 X18 · Repo Disposal-pattern correctness 10.0 X19 · Repo Unrestored process-global state 10.0 X21 · Repo Side-effecting pattern guard 10.0 X22 · Repo Contradicted release guard 10.0 X23 · Repo Unguarded diagnostic materialisation 10.0 X25 · Repo Inert configuration knob 10.0 X28 · Repo Index access outside its own emptiness guard 10.0 X29 · Repo Per-element action decided by a fixed element 10.0 X3 · Repo Exception handling 10.0 X30 · Repo Support guard that admits what it rejects 10.0 X4 · Repo Structured logging 6.7 X5 · Repo Nullable reference types 9.3
The Ugly
R7 · React / TS Dead Code 2.1

At a glance — Architecture · 76% · Adequate · gated by D26 ·

The Good
D6 · TypeScript Cohesion (LCOM4) 8.0 D35 · TypeScript Change Coupling 10.0 AX10 · Repo Code composition 6.3 AX3 · Repo Project dependency cycles 10.0 AX5 · Repo Architecture & structure 10.0 AX6 · Repo Interface segregation 9.0 R9 · React / TS Circular Imports 10.0
The Ugly
D26 · TypeScript Project Cohesion 0.0

At a glance — Maturity · 61% · Adequate · gated by M2 ·

The Good
D15 · TypeScript Churn × Complexity Hotspots 9.9 D19 · TypeScript Documentation Quality 9.0 D21 · TypeScript Naming Consistency 10.0 M1 · Repo Documentation (README) 8.0 M3 · Repo Folder & project structure 8.0 M4 · Repo Documentation accuracy 10.0
The Ugly
M2 · Repo Architecture documentation 2.0

At a glance — Readiness · 14% · Weak · gated by D9, R4, P1, P3, P5 ·

The Good
D12 · TypeScript Dependency Hygiene 7.8 D13 · TypeScript Secret Scanning 10.0 D14 · TypeScript License Compliance 10.0 P2 · Repo Observability 7.0 R6 · React / TS Tooling 6.6 R8 · React / TS Dependency Hygiene 8.0
The Bad
P4 · Repo Deployment & Rollback 5.0
The Ugly
P1 · Repo CI/CD gates 0.0 P3 · Repo Security & performance tooling 0.0 P5 · Repo DR & Backup 0.0 R4 · React / TS Test Coverage 0.0

At a glance — Security · 29% · Weak · gated by D30, C1, C2 ·

The Good
D28 · TypeScript Secrets (history) 10.0 D31 · TypeScript IaC & Container Security 9.6 D43 · TypeScript Malicious Dependencies 10.0 D44 · TypeScript Platform End-of-Life 10.0 X14 · Repo Bypassable address classification 10.0 X15 · Repo Unvalidated length from an untrusted reader 10.0 X17 · Repo Uncapped recursion over a caller-supplied document 10.0 X24 · Repo Document value interpolated into markup unescaped 10.0
The Bad
D29 · TypeScript Static Analysis (SAST) 6.2
The Ugly
D30 · TypeScript Dependency Vulnerabilities 0.0 C1 · Repo Data Protection 0.0 C2 · Repo Access Controls 3.3

At a glance — Domain Modelling · 100% · Exemplary ·

The Good
DM6 · Repo Domain ↔ infrastructure boundary 10.0 DM9 · Repo Scattered domain decisions 10.0

At a glance — Performance · 100% · Exemplary ·

The Good
PF3 · Repo Async & latency hygiene 10.0

Security & Compliance — OWASP Top-10 mapping

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

OWASP categoryFindingsSeverity
A03:2025 — Software Supply Chain Failures29High / Critical
A05:2025 — Injection7High / Critical
A02:2025 — Security Misconfiguration2High / Critical

Roadmap

Begin by addressing the single missing test in Test Distribution and the two deprecated dependencies in package.json to stabilize the codebase. Next, implement encryption for sensitive data at rest using a secure cipher and vault, while simultaneously resolving the twenty high-severity vulnerabilities in REDACTED. Finally, establish clear, named access rules with centralized guards to ensure permissions are reviewable and testable.

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

Do thisHelpsEffortDimension
Resolve the 1 No tests found finding(s) in Test Distribution.+17.5 ptsLowTest Distribution
Resolve the 2 Deprecated finding(s) in Dependency Hygiene — start with package.json (2).+5.0 ptsLowDependency Hygiene
Encrypt sensitive data at rest (AES-256-GCM through node:crypto createCipheriv, or a column-encryption layer such as typeorm-encrypted / prisma-field-encryption / MongoDB CSFLE) and manage keys in a vault (AWS KMS, Azure Key Vault, GCP KMS, HashiCorp Vault). Skip if delegated to infra (Postgres TDE, KMS, etc.).+8.3 ptsMediumData Protection
Name the access rules — roles/permissions declared once (a @Roles/@Permissions decorator with its guard, a CASL ability, a casbin model, or Supabase CREATE POLICY) and consulted where access is checked, so the rule set is reviewable and testable on its own.+5.0 ptsMediumAccess Controls
Resolve the 20 High CVE finding(s) in Dependency Vulnerabilities — start with REDACTED (20).+2.9 ptsMediumDependency Vulnerabilities
Resolve the 6 REDACTED finding(s) in Static Analysis (SAST) — start with REDACTED (3), REDACTED (2), REDACTED.+1.4 ptsLowStatic Analysis (SAST)
Add a CI workflow that builds and runs the test suite on every push/PR.+2.8 ptsMediumCI/CD gates
Run what this repository's stack ships: CodeQL's javascript-typescript pack, `semgrep --config=p/typescript`, or eslint-plugin-security — 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.+2.8 ptsMediumSecurity & performance tooling

File quality

Per-file score 0–10 — a quality signature. Of 19 files carrying findings, judged against the Template bar: 5% slop · 11% mixed · 84% near-clean.

FileScoreBandWorst signal
REDACTED0.0SlopDependency Vulnerabilities: Critical CVE: REDACTED
REDACTED4.1MixedStatic Analysis (SAST): Medium: REDACTED
REDACTED5.1MixedIaC & Container Security: High IaC: REDACTED
src/server/domain/repositories/types/todo-repository-types.ts6.6Near-cleanExplicit Debt: TodoComment
REDACTED6.9Near-cleanStatic Analysis (SAST): Medium: REDACTED
REDACTED7.2Near-cleanStatic Analysis (SAST): High: REDACTED
src/server/domain/repositories/schemas/todo-repository-schemas.ts7.3Near-cleanExplicit Debt: TodoComment
src/app/_components/TodoList.tsx7.8Near-cleanCyclomatic Complexity: TodoList.TodoList (cyclomatic 16)
package.json7.8Near-cleanDependency Hygiene: Deprecated: next
REDACTED7.9Near-cleanStatic Analysis (SAST): Medium: REDACTED
src/server/api/trpc.ts8.2Near-cleanExplicit Debt: TodoComment
src/server/lib/auth.ts8.2Near-cleanExplicit Debt: TodoComment
src/server/lib/error-handlers/trpc-error-handler.ts8.5Near-cleanCognitive Complexity: trpc-error-handler.handleServiceError (cognitive 19)
src/components/layout/Header.tsx8.5Near-cleanGod Classes: FunctionTooLong: Header.Header
src/app/_components/TodoItem.tsx8.5Near-cleanGod Classes: FunctionTooLong: TodoItem.TodoItem
src/components/auth/RegisterForm.tsx8.5Near-cleanGod Classes: FunctionTooLong: RegisterForm.RegisterForm
src/app/profile/page.tsx8.5Near-cleanGod Classes: FunctionTooLong: page.ProfileContent
src/app/_components/AddTodoForm.tsx8.5Near-cleanGod Classes: FunctionTooLong: AddTodoForm.AddTodoForm
src/server/lib/auth-api.ts8.5Near-cleanCohesion (LCOM4): Low cohesion: AuthUserAPI (LCOM4 4)

How the grades work

Every finding carries one of four grades. Three say how serious it is. The fourth says this survey could not settle it — and it is a grade, not a gap.

Critical — 25

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 — 99

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 — 82

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

Could not be resolved — 9

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. 66 of 69 evaluated dimensions are computed purely by tools and static analysis (confidence 1.0); 3 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 — 69 dimensions across the health lenses
D1D2D3D6D9D12D13D14D15D17D19D21D26D28D29D30D31D35D43D44AX10AX3AX5AX6C1C2DM6DM9GD1IC1M1M2M3M4P1P2P3P4P5PF3R1R10R2R3R4R6R7R8R9X1X12X13X14X15X16X17X18X19X21X22X23X24X25X28X29X3X30X4X5

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
  1. 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, 167 of 206 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.)
  2. 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.
  3. 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.

MethodBacksVersionEvaluator
Roslyn static analysisComplexity, cohesion, coupling, dead code, API surface, layering5.3.0✓ deterministic
Native secret scannerHardcoded secrets / credentials1.0.0✓ deterministic
Watchdog duplication detector (in-process)Code duplication1.0.0✓ deterministic
Coverage (coverlet / dotnet-coverage)Line & branch coverage10.0.400✓ deterministic
NuGet / dotnetOutdated, vulnerable & deprecated dependencies10.0.400✓ deterministic
git / LibGit2SharpChurn hotspots, knowledge concentration, history2.43.0 · 0.31.0✓ deterministic
gitleaks · semgrep · trivy · checkovSecrets in history, SAST, CVEs, IaC & container, PII / GDPR1.86.0 · 0.69.3 · 3.2.533✓ deterministic
LLM (sampled · advisory)Documentation quality, ADR conformance, naming — sampled over a bounded sample; advisory, never a deterministic measurementLocal LLM◐ LLM · sampled · advisory

Every finding is locatable in findings.md. Run 01a16440-0e66-7718-ab63-21b7afb502c3.

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

Run transparency — what happened this run

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

  • D16 Bus Factor — not measured this run — This is a true statement about the repository that carries nothing for its owner to act on, so it is reported here rather than as a defect in their code. Single-contributor repository — bus factor is not applicable (1 contributor(s) across 34 commit(s) sampled, automation and bot accounts excluded). Concentration needs a team to concentrate: with one contributor there is nobody to spread the knowledge to, so there is nothing here for the owner to act on.
  • D22 Internal API Consistency — not measured this run — This is a true statement about the repository that carries nothing for its owner to act on, so it is reported here rather than as a defect in their code. This repository's source is written only in languages whose packages are published through a manifest, and no manifest in the tree makes a publication act: either there is no package manifest of any ecosystem (no package.json, pyproject.toml, setup.py, gemspec, Cargo.toml, pom.xml, build.gradle, composer.json, pubspec.yaml or mix.exs), or every one present declares in its package manager's own terms that it is not published (an npm package marked "private": true, a Cargo package with publish = false, a pubspec with publish_to: none, a Composer "project", a Poetry project with package-mode = false, or the "Private :: Do Not Upload" classifier). With no publication act there is no intentionally-exposed surface for API consistency to be judged over.
  • D27 Navigability — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. Navigability is taken over call sites whose callee resolved. For C# that population includes calls into referenced assemblies; for this language only calls declared inside the repository count, so the abstention threshold reads the repository's use of its standard library as a resolution failure. That is a limit of this analyzer, not a build problem in this repository.
  • D32 Data Compliance (PII/GDPR) — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. `src/server/infrastructure/repositories/drizzle-role-repository.ts`, `src/server/lib/db.ts` produced a parse error, so every rule in this engine's `gdpr.yml` was absent there. That absence is NOT a clean result: these rules detect personal data crossing a boundary into a log sink, a URL or browser storage, and a file that was never parsed cannot report any of the three. The rest of the tree analysed normally and its rows above stand; only these files are unaccounted for. You can widen what we reach: fix the syntax error (or exclude the file deliberately) and re-scan to cover it.
  • D34 Knowledge Freshness — not measured this run — This is a true statement about the repository that carries nothing for its owner to act on, so it is reported here rather than as a defect in their code. Too few commits to judge knowledge freshness (34 commit(s) sampled).
  • AXR1 Runtime accessibility — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. Render strategy: boot via DockerCompose (REDACTED). compose up failed (exit 18 — an image could not be pulled) — drizzle-gateway Pulling postgres Pulling postgres Error Get "https://registry-1.docker.io/v2/": Forbidden drizzle-gateway Error context canceled Error response from daemon: Get "https://registry-1.docker.io/v2/": Forbidden; the earlier `compose pull` step reported: postgres Pulling drizzle-gateway Pulling postgres Error Get "https://registry-1.docker.io/v2/": Forbidden drizzle-gateway Error context canceled Error response from daemon: Get "https://registry-1.docker.io/v2/": Forbidden; the runtime sandbox reaches registries only through the in-fence pull-through mirror, so an image the mirror does not carry cannot be fetched — this is a limit of our sandbox, not of your stack; runtime evidence skipped.
  • DM9 Scattered domain decisions — measured, with a gap in what it reached — Watchdog measured this, but not all of it. What it did not reach is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — so the numbers on that dimension cover less than the repository, and the part left out is not evidence that it would have passed. Arm two tells a construction that PRODUCES a measurement from one that merely passes it along, and this repository's frontend does not compute that fact. A measurement built independently in two places would not appear above.
  • P8 Schema migrations — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. The schema may be created by a runner, a deploy script or a config file outside what this check reads, so an absence here is our blind spot rather than a missing migration strategy. The card abstains instead of scoring. You can widen what we reach: if the schema is created and evolved by a tool this check does not name, naming it lets us teach the detector to read it.
  • R10 Code Duplication — measured, with a gap in what it reached — Watchdog measured this, but not all of it. What it did not reach is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — so the numbers on that dimension cover less than the repository, and the part left out is not evidence that it would have passed. 2 further occurrence(s) are not listed individually; the score already reflects all 42.
  • R7 Dead Code — measured, with a gap in what it reached — Watchdog measured this, but not all of it. What it did not reach is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — so the numbers on that dimension cover less than the repository, and the part left out is not evidence that it would have passed. 1 further occurrence(s) are not listed individually; the score already reflects all 41.
  • 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. 76 JavaScript/TypeScript file(s) were read for weak hashes and ciphers, key material fixed in the source, disabled certificate validation and obsolete TLS versions, and none was found. The server controls this dimension also scores were not assessed, so no score is given.
  • X2 Cancellation propagation — not measured this run — Watchdog could not measure this here. That is a gap on our side — a collector, parser or image we have not built yet — and it is neither a defect in this repository nor evidence that the check would have passed. This check reads C# syntax, and JavaScript/TypeScript, Go, PHP, Dart, Kotlin, Ruby, Scala, Java, Python and Rust source only, and no C# was loaded, and no named async function in this repository's JavaScript/TypeScript, nor any Go, PHP or Dart function or Kotlin suspend function, makes a request that can be cancelled (fetch, axios, ky, ofetch; net/http, net.Dial; amphp; Dio; Ktor, OkHttp), so there is nothing to judge, 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.
  • 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.
  • D12 Dependency Hygiene: Dependency health reads manifests and lockfiles — a vulnerability in a vendored/copied dependency, or risk from how a dependency is actually used, is outside this view.
  • D13 Secret Scanning: Secret detection is signature- and entropy-based on the current tree — a secret that does not match a known pattern, or one already rotated, will not be flagged (a clean scan is "nothing matched", not "no secrets exist").
  • D14 License Compliance: License compatibility is checked against declared package metadata and a policy — mislabelled or missing license metadata, and obligations that depend on how you distribute, are not resolved here.
  • D15 Churn × Complexity Hotspots: Churn hotspots come from git history — a freshly imported or squashed repository has no churn signal, and recent rewrites can mask a historically risky file.
  • D17 Explicit Debt: Acknowledged-debt signals (TODO/FIXME, suppressions, dead code) are textual — undocumented debt that nobody marked, and debt that lives in design rather than annotations, is invisible. Committed machine-written code (scaffolded migrations, designer/codegen output, generated stubs) is excluded — it is never the team's dead code to delete.
  • D19 Documentation Quality: Documentation quality is judged by an LLM over a bounded sample of docs — it reads what is written, not whether the docs match the running system, and it is advisory, not a measurement. Its critique rows are drawn from a closed category vocabulary and each row means the same thing in every run, so two scans can be compared row by row; the SET that fires is still a sample, and does not repeat exactly. Measured on one frozen input, six scans at one engine SHA: 2-5 critique rows per scan, 8 distinct rows across the six, 3 of those 8 seen in only one scan. So a D19 row is evidence about the documentation, but a COUNT of D19 rows is not a quantity — never read a change in it as an improvement or a regression.
  • D21 Naming Consistency: Naming quality is an LLM judgement over a bounded sample — it assesses clarity/consistency of the names it sees, not domain-correctness, and is advisory.
  • D26 Project Cohesion: Project focus is sized from members/namespaces per project — a project that is broad by deliberate design reads the same as one that has sprawled.
  • D28 Secrets (history): Secret-history scanning sweeps the git log for known patterns — a secret that predates the available history, or never matched a signature, is not found (clean means "nothing matched in the history we can see").
  • D29 Static Analysis (SAST): SAST findings are pattern-based (semgrep) — it finds classes of bug it has rules for; logic flaws, auth/authorization gaps and issues needing runtime context are out of reach (and clean means "no rule matched").
  • D30 Dependency Vulnerabilities: CVE matching depends on accurate package/version metadata and on the advisory databases — a vulnerability with no published advisory, or in code not declared as a dependency, is not seen. Coverage needs a RESOLVED graph: an unpinned requirements.txt, or a pom without a resolved build, yields partial coverage rather than a clean verdict. An ecosystem the analyzer cannot scan is reported as unmeasured, never as clean.
  • D31 IaC & Container Security: IaC scanning checks Dockerfiles/Terraform/Kubernetes against best-practice rules — it cannot see the live cloud account, runtime configuration, or drift between the committed config and what is actually deployed.
  • D35 Change Coupling: Change coupling is co-change in COMMITS — files split across separate commits, or coupled only through a shared config/build step, read as uncoupled, and a sweeping commit (rename/format) is excluded so it doesn't couple everything. It shows that files change together, not WHY: a high coupling can be a healthy cohesive pair as readily as a hidden leak.
  • D43 Malicious Dependencies: Only packages some vulnerability database has already NAMED as malicious are seen — a compromise published in the last hours, or never reported at all, is invisible here, and this dimension reading 10 is not evidence that a dependency is trustworthy. There is no typosquat or dependency-confusion analysis: a package nobody has reported is simply absent from the feeds. Coverage is the dependency scan's: an ecosystem that could not be scanned is disclosed as unmeasured, never as clean.
  • D44 Platform End-of-Life: The support table is FROZEN, so it goes out of date by losing RECALL: a release that ended support after the table was written is missed until the table is refreshed, and this dimension reading 10 is not evidence that a platform is current. Only platforms the repository DECLARES in a place this pass reads are seen — a runtime named only in a Dockerfile (D31's subject), in a CI workflow (D29's), or in a file this pass does not parse (go.mod, a Gemfile ruby directive) is invisible here, which is why a repository declaring none of them abstains rather than scoring. Only frameworks with a PUBLISHED support policy are tracked: React, Flask and Express publish none, so their age cannot be judged and their absence from a report is not a statement that they are supported.
  • AX10 Code composition: Role is inferred from namespace/folder convention, not semantics — a domain concept living in a folder named "Services" reads as application, and the split is lines-of-code, not business value. The business-logic-share score is a SOFT, FLOORED signal: it contributes to the Architecture lens but is floored at the Critical gate, so an infrastructure-heavy design (a gateway, an ETL, a driver) is legitimately low without being nuked to zero.
  • DM6 Domain ↔ infrastructure boundary: Infrastructure reached through a hand-rolled wrapper, a domain-named facade, reflection, or a string-keyed service locator resolves to a non-infra type and isn't seen; the body scan is symbol resolution over syntax, not full dataflow. A clean result means "no resolved infra reference in a domain body", not a proof of purity.
  • M4 Documentation accuracy: Onboarding quality is an LLM read of the docs/setup present — it cannot run the onboarding or measure how long a real new joiner takes; the verdict is sampled and advisory.
  • P4 Deployment & Rollback: Approval/branch-protection rules live in repository settings the scan cannot see — only their in-repo evidence (config files, workflows) is checked, so a control enforced purely in the host's settings reads as "not evidenced".
  • P5 DR & Backup: Backup/restore and disaster-recovery readiness is judged from in-repo evidence — a config that exists is not a tested restore, so the absence of positive evidence is reported as "not evidenced", never scored as present.

The LLM boundary

LLM-set scores this run (3): D19, D21, M4 (model: Local LLM). For these, a model reads a bounded sample and sets the numeric score; each names its own sample and method on its card. They are sampled and advisory by design: they vary at the margins between runs and are never a deterministic measurement. Every other score in this report is tool-computed at confidence 1.0.

Dimensions

D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity9.8 / 10Stronggated by 1 serious finding✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

1 method(s) exceeded the cyclomatic complexity threshold of 15; the worst was TodoList.TodoList at 16.

TodoList.TodoList (cyclomatic 16)src/app/_components/TodoList.tsx:26

What to do

  1. Bring the 1 body over 15 down to 15 or less in Cyclomatic Complexity — start with TodoList.TodoList (cyclomatic 16). — Refactoring it lifts Cyclomatic Complexity from 9.9 to about 10.0/10.
  2. 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.

D2 · Cognitive Complexity9.7 / 10Stronggated by 1 serious finding✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

1 method(s) exceeded the cognitive complexity threshold of 15; the worst was trpc-error-handler.handleServiceError at 19.

trpc-error-handler.handleServiceError (cognitive 19)src/server/lib/error-handlers/trpc-error-handler.ts:20

What to do

  1. Bring the 1 body over 15 down to 15 or less in Cognitive Complexity — start with trpc-error-handler.handleServiceError (cognitive 19). — Refactoring it lifts Cognitive Complexity from 9.7 to about 10.0/10.
  2. 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.

D3 · God Classes6.5 / 10Adequate✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

8 god class(es) detected.

FunctionTooLong: TodoList.TodoList · ×6src/app/_components/TodoList.tsx:26
ClassTooLong: DrizzleUserRepositoryREDACTED:42
FileTooLong: REDACTEDREDACTED

What to do

  1. Resolve the 6 FunctionTooLong finding(s) in God Classes — start with TodoList.tsx, Header.tsx, TodoItem.tsx. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (6 warning-level).
  2. Resolve the 1 ClassTooLong finding(s) in God Classes — start with REDACTED. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).
  3. Resolve the 1 FileTooLong finding(s) in God Classes — start with REDACTED. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).
  4. 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.

D6 · Cohesion (LCOM4)8.0 / 10Strong✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

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

1 of 6 classes have LCOM4 above 3.

Low cohesion: AuthUserAPI (LCOM4 4)src/server/lib/auth-api.ts:53

What to do

  1. Resolve the 1 Low cohesion finding(s) in Cohesion (LCOM4) — start with auth-api.ts. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).
  2. Stand up a CI pipeline, then gate Cohesion (LCOM4) 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: d6_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.

D9 · Test Distribution0.0 / 10Critical✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

No test suite found.

No tests found

What to do

  1. Resolve the 1 No tests found finding(s) in Test Distribution. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 recommendation-level).

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

D12 · Dependency Hygiene7.8 / 10Strong✓ Tool-verified

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

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

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 7.8 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Verified

24 outdated direct production npm dependency(ies) of 28 graded, 0 pinning defect(s), across 1 package.json (1 of them the product) and 1 committed lockfile(s). Development dependencies are deliberately not graded for currency: that grade is about what SHIPS. 2 direct dependency(ies) — production, development or optional — are marked DEPRECATED by their publisher (the registry's per-version mark, or the lockfile's copy of it when the registry could not be asked); deprecated transitive packages are listed but not charged. Whether any is UNMAINTAINED is not graded — the registry publishes no maintenance status, and release age does not stand in for one. Whether any is UNUSED is not graded either: that is a source question, and the frontend dependency lens (R8) answers it in this same run. Known CVEs in this dependency graph are D30's question, read from the manifest there.

Deprecated: next · ×2package.json:30
Deprecated: @esbuild-kit/core-utils · ×2REDACTED:171
Outdated (npm): @mantine/core · ×24

What to do

  1. Resolve the 2 Deprecated finding(s) in Dependency Hygiene — start with package.json (2). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (2 warning-level).
  2. Resolve the 2 Deprecated finding(s) in Dependency Hygiene — start with REDACTED (2). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (2 recommendation-level).
  3. Stand up a CI pipeline, then gate Dependency Hygiene 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: d12_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.

D13 · Secret Scanning10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

What it measures: Whether any secrets (keys, tokens, passwords) have leaked into the code.

Method: In-process native secret scanner (entropy plus signature patterns) across all tracked files; no external tool. A clean result is a measured 10, not no-data zero. Deterministic.

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

Secret scan ran and found no leaked secrets.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d13_recommendation.md.

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

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

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

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

0 of 28 shipped npm package(s) use a banned license. Licences were resolved from registry.npmjs.org over the 28 production dependency(ies) this repository's committed lockfile resolves, across 1 product package.json manifest(s). Its 14 `devDependencies` declaration(s) are excluded: a consumer installs none of them. ★ DEPTH: this is the DIRECT production set the lockfile resolves, NOT the transitive closure — only one of the four lock dialects this pass reads states a full graph, so a banned licence pulled in only by a dependency's OWN dependencies is outside this verdict, exactly as the JVM arm's declaration-site verdict is. ★ Each licence is the one the registry publishes for the package's CURRENT release rather than for the pinned version, which is the same caveat the Hex and RubyGems arms carry. 1 of them publish no licence this pass can read on registry.npmjs.org — an absent field, `UNLICENSED`, or a `SEE LICENSE IN <file>` pointer into a tarball this pass does not download; that is missing data, not a violation, and none of them is charged.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d14_recommendation.md.

D15 · Churn × Complexity Hotspots9.9 / 10Stronggated by 1 serious finding✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

Top hotspots: src/app/_components/TodoList.tsx (3×16=48)

Hotspot: src/app/_components/TodoList.tsxsrc/app/_components/TodoList.tsx:26

What to do

  1. Resolve the 1 Hotspot finding(s) in Churn × Complexity Hotspots — start with TodoList.tsx. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).

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

D17 · Explicit Debt9.8 / 10Stronggated by 8 serious findings✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

8 deducted task-comment markers across 7814 LoC (0.1/KLoC) → score 9.8. Task comments only: this repository's language is read without a compiler, so D17's suppression, dead-code and commented-out-code arms did not run and this score counts fewer marker kinds than a .NET repository's would.

TodoComment · ×8src/server/api/trpc.ts:154

What to do

  1. Resolve the 8 TodoComment finding(s) in Explicit Debt — start with todo-repository-types.ts (4), todo-repository-schemas.ts (2), trpc.ts. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (8 warning-level).
  2. Stand up a CI pipeline, then gate Explicit Debt 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: d17_recommendation.md · top locations in Appendix A, every location in findings.md.

D19 · Documentation QualityExemplary◐ Sampled · advisory

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

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

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

The repository is documented with a single root README and two architecture/design docs (README.md + DESIGN_PATTERNS.md + repo-architecture.md), covering the project's purpose, features, tech stack, an enterprise-level overview of the schema-based repository pattern, its core principles, dedicated-method-over-generic-operations design, type safety at compile-time and runtime, migration guidance, and a full outline. The README is the single document that needs to be judged for its scope (the Todo App Template itself), but it is clear and complete within its own directory; the architecture docs are focused on the pattern with concrete examples.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d19_recommendation.md.

D21 · Naming ConsistencyExemplary◐ Sampled · advisory

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

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

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

0 naming inconsistencies across 0 sampled symbols.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d21_recommendation.md.

D26 · Project Cohesion0.0 / 10Critical✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

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

Projects may be oversized for their cohesion

What to do

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

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

D28 · Secrets (history)10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

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.

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

gitleaks scanned the full history AND the current working tree and found no secrets.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d28_recommendation.md.

D29 · Static Analysis (SAST)6.2 / 10Adequate✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 6.2 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

7 finding(s): 0 critical, 1 high, 6 medium, 0 low. semgrep hit a parse error in 2 file(s) — `src/server/infrastructure/repositories/drizzle-role-repository.ts` (line 47, line 52, line 57), `src/server/lib/db.ts` (line 7) — so no absence of findings in the named regions is evidence of anything; rows reported elsewhere in those files are real. Fix the syntax error (or exclude the file deliberately) and re-scan to cover them.

REDACTED
REDACTED

What to do

  1. Resolve the 6 REDACTED finding(s) in Static Analysis (SAST) — start with REDACTED (3), REDACTED (2), REDACTED. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (6 warning-level).
  2. Resolve the 1 REDACTED finding(s) in Static Analysis (SAST) — start with REDACTED. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 issue-level).

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

D30 · Dependency Vulnerabilities0.0 / 10Critical✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

29 finding(s): 3 critical, 20 high, 5 medium, 1 low.

REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED
REDACTED

What to do

  1. Resolve the 20 High CVE finding(s) in Dependency Vulnerabilities — start with REDACTED (20). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (20 issue-level).
  2. Resolve the 3 Critical CVE finding(s) in Dependency Vulnerabilities — start with REDACTED (3). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (3 issue-level).
  3. Resolve the 3 Medium CVE finding(s) in Dependency Vulnerabilities — start with REDACTED (3). — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (3 warning-level).

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

D31 · IaC & Container Security9.6 / 10Adequategated by 1 critical finding✓ Tool-verified

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

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

Maturity: Documented → Verified → Prevented · effective 9.6 / 10 · rule-coverage 100% · ceiling Documented

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

REDACTED
REDACTED

What to do

  1. Resolve the 1 High IaC finding(s) in IaC & Container Security — start with REDACTED. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 issue-level).
  2. Resolve the 1 Medium IaC finding(s) in IaC & Container Security — start with REDACTED. — One of this dimension's main actionable groups (1 warning-level).

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

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

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

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

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

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

No strong hidden change-coupling between production files.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d35_recommendation.md.

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

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

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

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

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

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d43_recommendation.md.

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

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

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

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

0 end-of-life runtime(s) and 0 end-of-life framework(s), read from 0 platform declaration(s) and 28 dependency declaration(s). This dimension reads what the repository says about ITSELF — a pinned target framework, a version file, a capped requires-python, a Rust toolchain pin, a framework major a constraint cannot move off. A FLOOR is deliberately never charged: `requires-python = ">=3.8"` states what the package SUPPORTS, not what it runs on, and a well-maintained library declares exactly that while running its own CI on a current release. The end-of-life facts are FROZEN and dated, so this dimension needs no network and answers identically inside a closed scan fence; as the table ages it loses recall and never precision, because a statement about support that ended in the past cannot become false. The OS layer of a container image is D31's question and the toolchain a CI workflow installs is D29's; this row is neither.

✓ On the Gold path — maintain.

Detailed fixes: d44_recommendation.md.

Frontend & cross-cutting dimensions

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

AX10 · Code composition6.3 / 10Strong✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

AX6 · Interface segregation9.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

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

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

  • `IRoleRepository` declares 19 required operations: `create`, `findById`, `findByName`, `findByNames`, `findAll`, `updateBasicInfo`, `updateBasicInfoPartial`, `updateName`, `updateDescription`, `deleteById`, `assignRoleToUser`, `removeRoleFromUser`, `setUserRoles`, `updateUserRolesBulk`, `getUserRoleNames`, `getUsersWithRoles`, `userHasRole`, `userHasAnyRole`, `userHasAllRoles`. Counted over its REQUIRED operations — a method signature or a function-typed property with no `?`, once per signature; optional members and data properties are not counted, because no implementer is forced to write them. A wide interface forces every implementer and caller to depend on methods they don't use (the Interface-Segregation 'I' in SOLID). Split it into focused role-interfaces. — src/server/domain/repositories/role-repository.ts:27

What to do

  • Split fat interfaces into focused role-interfaces so clients depend only on what they use.
C1 · Data Protection0.0 / 10Critical✓ Tool-verified

Other · Security — Whether sensitive data is encrypted at rest and in transit and keys are vaulted.

Method: Roslyn plus filesystem scan: encryption presence (EF ColumnEncryption, key-vault references, HTTPS enforcement) and key-derivation KDF detection. Deterministic.

  • No encryption usage (node:crypto createCipheriv, Web Crypto subtle.encrypt, crypto-js AES, tweetnacl/libsodium secretbox, a column-encryption layer such as typeorm-encrypted, prisma-field-encryption or mongoose-field-encryption, or MongoDB client-side field-level encryption) was found, and this repository persists personal data in the model cited here — sensitive data at rest may be unprotected. If TDE/KMS/vault is delegated to infrastructure, ignore. — src/server/infrastructure/db/schema/user.ts:12

What to do

  • Encrypt sensitive data at rest (AES-256-GCM through node:crypto createCipheriv, or a column-encryption layer such as typeorm-encrypted / prisma-field-encryption / MongoDB CSFLE) and manage keys in a vault (AWS KMS, Azure Key Vault, GCP KMS, HashiCorp Vault). Skip if delegated to infra (Postgres TDE, KMS, etc.).
  • Enforce HTTPS (serve through https.createServer / NestJS httpsOptions, or redirect plain HTTP with express-sslify behind your TLS terminator) so data in transit is always encrypted.
C2 · Access Controls3.3 / 10Weak✓ Tool-verified

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

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

  • Authorization IS enforced here (by route guards, auth middleware or checks that refuse a caller) — this is NOT a claim that endpoints are unprotected. What's missing is a NAMED rule set: who may do what is encoded inline where it is checked, so the rules can't be listed, reviewed or tested apart from the code that applies them. Recommendation, not a defect.
  • Only 2 place(s) refuse an unauthorized caller — too few to demonstrate default-deny across handlers.

What to do

  • Name the access rules — roles/permissions declared once (a @Roles/@Permissions decorator with its guard, a CASL ability, a casbin model, or Supabase CREATE POLICY) and consulted where access is checked, so the rule set is reviewable and testable on its own.
  • Enforce authorization at every handler — a guard on each route, or a global authentication guard/middleware with explicit public opt-outs, so protected-by-default is demonstrable.
DM6 · Domain ↔ infrastructure boundary10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

Other · Domain Modelling — Whether the domain layer stays free of infrastructure dependencies — a domain aggregate fused to a persistence ORM (TypeORM/Prisma/MikroORM/Sequelize/Mongoose) on its own declaration (active-record) couples the domain to infrastructure. The clean-architecture dependency rule.

Method: Roslyn (DDD-gated): domain-layer types scanned for infrastructure usage in member SIGNATURES and inside method/accessor BODIES — resolved calls and object-creations into EF/Marten/HTTP/Mongo/Redis/message-bus types (not just a namespace allowlist). Deterministic, symbol-resolved, exhaustive over domain-layer bodies, DDD-native.

Coverage: Domain layer identified by NAMESPACE heuristic; infrastructure then resolved by symbol in member SIGNATURES and method/accessor BODIES — rename the layer and the check evaporates.

DM9 · Scattered domain decisions10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

Other · Domain Modelling — Whether one domain rule is decided — or one measurement produced — in more than one place, rather than living on the type that owns it.

Method: Neutral body surface plus Roslyn (DDD-gated), two arms. DECISION (Roslyn only): a predicate over a domain type's members judged in two or more types, where none of those decisions live on the owning type — operands of comparisons and relational property patterns only, so a member merely passed as an argument is not judged. DERIVATION: a plain all-numeric carrier of ≥2 members, with no base type and exactly one constructor, CONSTRUCTED as the result of a method (returned or assigned, never inline as an argument) in two or more types other than its own — the same measurement produced twice, which centralising the judgement does not fix. DERIVATION runs on every language whose frontend declares the produced-or-passed fact per construction (Roslyn and the Java sidecar today); a target with only the derivation arm carries an engine gap naming the decision arm as not assessed, and a frontend that declares nothing keeps the dimension not measured rather than clean. Single-member rules, test code and generated code are out of population for both. Advisory.

GD1 · Unfinished & placeholder code10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

Other · Code Health — Unreviewed-generation residue in this repository's JavaScript/TypeScript: functions whose whole body still throws a "not implemented" error, and placeholder text (lorem ipsum, changeme/replace_me…) left in strings and JSX of non-test, non-generated code. Scored as a quality signature, never as a claim about authorship.

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

IC1 · Incompleteness & stubs10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

Other · Code Health — Unfinished work detected by code SHAPE, not keywords, in this repository's JavaScript/TypeScript: functions that only throw a "not implemented" error, functions that take inputs and return a constant or do nothing, async functions that never await, dead `if (false)` branches, and skeleton classes most of whose methods are holes.

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

M1 · Documentation (README)8.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

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

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

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

What to do

  • Record your significant design decisions. Write one short document per decision, giving its date, the situation, the decision and its consequences, and keep them together with your other design documents. A docs/adr folder with each file named by number and title is the easiest place to find them.
M3 · Folder & project structure8.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

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

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

What to do

  • Start a test surface where your build system looks for one (tests/, test/, spec/, or your ecosystem's test source set) — the separation follows from putting the first tests in the right place.
M4 · Documentation accuracy10.0 / 10Exemplary◐ Sampled · advisory

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

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

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

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

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

  • `src/app/error.tsx` reports through `console.*` at line 15 although other files in its module log through a logger. Console lines carry no level, fields or correlation and never reach the log pipeline. — src/app/error.tsx:15
  • `src/app/api/trpc/[trpc]/route.ts` reports through `console.*` at line 27 although other files in its module log through a logger. Console lines carry no level, fields or correlation and never reach the log pipeline. — src/app/api/trpc/[trpc]/route.ts:27
  • `src/server/api/trpc.ts` reports through `console.*` at line 106 although other files in its module log through a logger. Console lines carry no level, fields or correlation and never reach the log pipeline. — src/server/api/trpc.ts:106
  • `src/server/lib/auth-api.ts` reports through `console.*` at line 111 although other files in its module log through a logger. Console lines carry no level, fields or correlation and never reach the log pipeline. — src/server/lib/auth-api.ts:111
  • `src/server/lib/auth-api.ts` reports through `console.*` at line 114 although other files in its module log through a logger. Console lines carry no level, fields or correlation and never reach the log pipeline. — src/server/lib/auth-api.ts:114
  • `src/server/lib/auth-api.ts` reports through `console.*` at line 135 although other files in its module log through a logger. Console lines carry no level, fields or correlation and never reach the log pipeline. — src/server/lib/auth-api.ts:135
  • `src/server/lib/auth-api.ts` reports through `console.*` at line 156 although other files in its module log through a logger. Console lines carry no level, fields or correlation and never reach the log pipeline. — src/server/lib/auth-api.ts:156
  • `src/server/lib/auth-api.ts` reports through `console.*` at line 196 although other files in its module log through a logger. Console lines carry no level, fields or correlation and never reach the log pipeline. — src/server/lib/auth-api.ts:196
  • `src/server/lib/auth-api.ts` reports through `console.*` at line 209 although other files in its module log through a logger. Console lines carry no level, fields or correlation and never reach the log pipeline. — src/server/lib/auth-api.ts:209
  • `src/server/utils/retry.ts` reports through `console.*` at line 53 although other files in its module log through a logger. Console lines carry no level, fields or correlation and never reach the log pipeline. — src/server/utils/retry.ts:53
  • `src/server/utils/retry.ts` reports through `console.*` at line 63 although other files in its module log through a logger. Console lines carry no level, fields or correlation and never reach the log pipeline. — src/server/utils/retry.ts:63
  • `src/server/utils/retry.ts` reports through `console.*` at line 70 although other files in its module log through a logger. Console lines carry no level, fields or correlation and never reach the log pipeline. — src/server/utils/retry.ts:70
  • `src/server/utils/retry.ts` reports through `console.*` at line 185 although other files in its module log through a logger. Console lines carry no level, fields or correlation and never reach the log pipeline. — src/server/utils/retry.ts:185
  • `src/server/utils/retry.ts` reports through `console.*` at line 188 although other files in its module log through a logger. Console lines carry no level, fields or correlation and never reach the log pipeline. — src/server/utils/retry.ts:188

What to do

  • Route service-code `console.*` output through the module's structured logger (with named fields), so delivery outcomes and failures reach the log pipeline with a level.
  • Consider OpenTelemetry tracing/metrics (@opentelemetry/sdk-node) and a health-check endpoint (@godaddy/terminus or a /health route) for operability.
P3 · Security & performance tooling0.0 / 10Critical✓ Tool-verified

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

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

  • No static application security testing detected. For this repository's stack, add CodeQL's javascript-typescript pack, `semgrep --config=p/typescript`, or eslint-plugin-security — 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: CodeQL's javascript-typescript pack, `semgrep --config=p/typescript`, or eslint-plugin-security — 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.
P4 · Deployment & Rollback5.0 / 10Adequate✓ Tool-verified

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

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

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

What to do

  • Add a `healthcheck:` to the served compose service — probing the endpoint it already answers on where it has one — with `depends_on: condition: service_healthy` on whatever waits for it, and keep the deployed image tag immutable and recorded so rolling back is re-pointing at the previous tag rather than rebuilding.
  • Add an approval/environment gate (required reviewers / protection rules) before production promotion.
P5 · DR & Backup0.0 / 10Critical✓ Tool-verified

Readiness · Readiness — Whether disaster recovery is planned and codified — backups, geo-recovery, RTO/RPO, persistence guarantees — from IaC + container manifests + docs, never the live cloud.

Method: Filesystem scan: disaster recovery, backup, geo-recovery, RTO/RPO, persistence guarantees from IaC, manifests, and docs. Exhaustive, deterministic, never a live environment.

  • A persistence guard (data volume / purge-protection) was found, but no backup, geo-recovery or RTO/RPO controls were evidenced — a volume that survives a container recreate is not a tested restore from catastrophic loss.

What to do

  • Codify backups + geo-recovery in IaC and document RTO/RPO and the restore procedure — a persistence guard alone is not disaster recovery.
PF3 · Async & latency hygiene10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

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

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

R1 · Type Safety10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

React / JS · Code Health — How much of the frontend is typed TypeScript vs untyped JavaScript.

Method: Frontend file inventory: the share of typed TypeScript vs untyped JavaScript across the source tree. Deterministic, exhaustive over frontend files.

R10 · Code Duplication7.6 / 10Strong✓ Tool-verified

React / JS · Code Health — Near-exact copy-pasted blocks of substantial extent across the frontend (the D4 clone algorithm over JS/TS tokens, D-386): a block is reported only where its copies still agree on most of their own identifiers and literals, or were renamed as they were pasted but kept most of their constants, and where the copies carry enough code to stand on their own or the copied extent reaches 30 lines — so a re-implementation sharing neither names nor values, and a small pasted declaration, are both found and deliberately not reported, and a clean R10 is not a claim that nothing was copied.

Method: Near-exact copy-pasted blocks of substantial extent across the frontend (the D4 clone algorithm run over JS/TS tokens). Masking finds the candidates; a block is reported when its copies still agree on most of their own identifiers and literals, or when a renamed copy still agrees on most of its constants, AND the copies carry enough code to stand on their own — or when the copied extent reaches 30 lines. So a re-implementation sharing neither names nor values, and a small pasted declaration, are deliberately not counted. Deterministic.

  • 5 duplicated blocks under src/server/ have copies in at least two of the sibling directories domain, infrastructure, schemas, services — 4 of them are reported below, and 1 is counted here but not reported individually: those copies match on shape but no longer clear R10's bar for an individually reported row — either they kept neither their own names nor their values, or what was copied is too small to stand on its own (it reports near-exact duplication only, and only of substantial extent). What this row states is the concentration, which the detector measured over all 5 and which does not depend on how exactly each block's copies still match. That concentration is one structural fact, not 5 local ones: the siblings replicate behaviour none of them owns, which is the shape of a missing shared module — a common library every sibling imports — rather than 5 separate extractions. Check first whether the siblings are deliberately standalone deliverables (scaffold templates, demo apps that must stay copy-pasteable); where they are, the duplication is the design and the per-block rows are the ones to act on. — src/server/infrastructure/repositories/drizzle-todo-repository.ts:566
  • src/components/auth/LoginForm.tsx:28 · src/components/auth/RegisterForm.tsx:46 — the two spans are one implementation copied and then locally edited — 527 tokens are still identical, in the same order in both files, with only local edits between them. The copies have already begun to drift, which is this row's finding: an edit made to one and not the other changes behaviour silently. Diff the two spans first to learn what genuinely differs, then extract the shared core into one module both sites use, passing the differences in as parameters — or, if one copy exists only because the other could not be imported from its context, make one of them the single source the other is generated or re-exported from. If one copy is no longer reachable, delete it rather than letting it shadow the live one. — src/components/auth/LoginForm.tsx:28
  • REDACTED:62 · REDACTED:532 — 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. — REDACTED:62
  • src/app/_components/AppHeader.tsx:21 · src/components/layout/Header.tsx:33 — the two spans are one implementation copied and then locally edited — 204 tokens are still identical, in the same order in both files, with only local edits between them. The copies have already begun to drift, which is this row's finding: an edit made to one and not the other changes behaviour silently. Diff the two spans first to learn what genuinely differs, then extract the shared core into one module both sites use, passing the differences in as parameters — or, if one copy exists only because the other could not be imported from its context, make one of them the single source the other is generated or re-exported from. If one copy is no longer reachable, delete it rather than letting it shadow the live one. — src/app/_components/AppHeader.tsx:21
  • src/server/api/routers/todo.ts:18 · src/server/api/routers/todo.ts:97 — the two spans are one implementation copied and then locally edited — 224 tokens are still identical, in the same order in both spans, with only local edits between them. The copies have already begun to drift, which is this row's finding: an edit made to one and not the other changes behaviour silently. Diff the two spans first to learn what genuinely differs, then extract the shared core into one module both sites use, passing the differences in as parameters — or, if one copy exists only because the other could not be imported from its context, make one of them the single source the other is generated or re-exported from. If one copy is no longer reachable, delete it rather than letting it shadow the live one. — src/server/api/routers/todo.ts:18
  • src/server/infrastructure/repositories/drizzle-todo-repository.ts:195 · src/server/infrastructure/repositories/drizzle-todo-repository.ts:243 · src/server/infrastructure/repositories/drizzle-todo-repository.ts:290 · src/server/infrastructure/repositories/drizzle-todo-repository.ts:336 — all 4 copies are in the same file, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported. — src/server/infrastructure/repositories/drizzle-todo-repository.ts:195
  • REDACTED:149 · REDACTED:193 · REDACTED:259 · REDACTED:299 · +4 more site(s) not listed — all 8 copies are in the same file, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported. — REDACTED:149
  • src/server/infrastructure/repositories/drizzle-role-repository.ts:100 · src/server/infrastructure/repositories/drizzle-role-repository.ts:126 — all 2 copies are in the same file, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported. — src/server/infrastructure/repositories/drizzle-role-repository.ts:100
  • src/server/infrastructure/repositories/drizzle-role-repository.ts:212 · src/server/infrastructure/repositories/drizzle-role-repository.ts:251 — 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. — src/server/infrastructure/repositories/drizzle-role-repository.ts:212
  • src/app/login/page.tsx:5 · src/app/register/page.tsx:5 — the 2 copies are spread across 2 directories, so the shared home is a decision rather than an obvious spot: check first whether one of them already owns this behaviour, and otherwise put the extracted module somewhere all of the sites already reach rather than making one of them depend on another. — src/app/login/page.tsx:5
  • src/server/infrastructure/repositories/drizzle-todo-repository.ts:263 · src/server/infrastructure/repositories/drizzle-todo-repository.ts:310 · src/server/infrastructure/repositories/drizzle-todo-repository.ts:356 — all 3 copies are in the same file, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported. — src/server/infrastructure/repositories/drizzle-todo-repository.ts:263
  • src/server/api/routers/todo.ts:120 · src/server/api/routers/todo.ts:180 — 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. — src/server/api/routers/todo.ts:120
  • src/server/infrastructure/repositories/drizzle-todo-repository.ts:110 · src/server/infrastructure/repositories/drizzle-todo-repository.ts:155 — all 2 copies are in the same file, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported. — src/server/infrastructure/repositories/drizzle-todo-repository.ts:110
  • src/server/lib/auth-api.ts:122 · src/server/lib/auth-api.ts:143 — 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. — src/server/lib/auth-api.ts:122
  • src/server/api/routers/todo.ts:218 · src/server/api/routers/todo.ts:259 — all 2 copies are in the same file, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported. — src/server/api/routers/todo.ts:218
  • src/server/infrastructure/repositories/drizzle-role-repository.ts:481 · src/server/infrastructure/repositories/drizzle-role-repository.ts:503 — 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. — src/server/infrastructure/repositories/drizzle-role-repository.ts:481
  • src/server/api/routers/todo.ts:161 · src/server/api/routers/todo.ts:212 · src/server/api/routers/todo.ts:253 — all 3 copies are in the same file, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported. — src/server/api/routers/todo.ts:161
  • src/server/services/todo-service.ts:235 · src/server/services/todo-service.ts:300 — 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. — src/server/services/todo-service.ts:235
  • src/app/_components/AddTodoForm.tsx:37 · src/app/_components/TodoItem.tsx:47 · src/app/_components/TodoItem.tsx:68 · src/app/_components/TodoItem.tsx:88 — the 4 copies are spread across 2 files, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported. — src/app/_components/AddTodoForm.tsx:37
  • src/app/error.tsx:19 · src/app/unauthorized/page.tsx:7 — the 2 copies are spread across 2 directories, so the shared home is a decision rather than an obvious spot: check first whether one of them already owns this behaviour, and otherwise put the extracted module somewhere all of the sites already reach rather than making one of them depend on another. — src/app/error.tsx:19
  • REDACTED:95 · REDACTED:150 — all 2 copies are in the same file, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported. — REDACTED:95
  • src/server/infrastructure/repositories/drizzle-todo-repository.ts:142 · src/server/infrastructure/repositories/drizzle-todo-repository.ts:191 · src/server/infrastructure/repositories/drizzle-todo-repository.ts:239 · src/server/infrastructure/repositories/drizzle-todo-repository.ts:286 · +3 more site(s) not listed — all 7 copies are in the same file, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported. — src/server/infrastructure/repositories/drizzle-todo-repository.ts:142
  • src/server/infrastructure/repositories/drizzle-todo-repository.ts:167 · src/server/infrastructure/repositories/drizzle-todo-repository.ts:211 · src/server/infrastructure/repositories/drizzle-todo-repository.ts:259 · src/server/infrastructure/repositories/drizzle-todo-repository.ts:306 · +1 more site(s) not listed — all 5 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. — src/server/infrastructure/repositories/drizzle-todo-repository.ts:167
  • src/server/infrastructure/repositories/drizzle-todo-repository.ts:530 · src/server/services/todo-service.ts:163 · src/server/services/todo-service.ts:239 · src/server/services/todo-service.ts:273 · +1 more site(s) not listed — the 5 copies are spread across 2 files, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported. — src/server/infrastructure/repositories/drizzle-todo-repository.ts:530
  • src/server/services/todo-service.ts:55 · src/server/services/todo-service.ts:197 — 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. — src/server/services/todo-service.ts:55
  • src/server/infrastructure/repositories/drizzle-role-repository.ts:300 · src/server/infrastructure/repositories/drizzle-role-repository.ts:327 — all 2 copies are in the same file, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported. — src/server/infrastructure/repositories/drizzle-role-repository.ts:300
  • src/server/infrastructure/repositories/drizzle-todo-repository.ts:496 · src/server/infrastructure/repositories/drizzle-todo-repository.ts:570 · src/server/services/todo-service.ts:128 — the 3 copies are spread across 2 files, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported. — src/server/infrastructure/repositories/drizzle-todo-repository.ts:496
  • src/server/scripts/migrate.ts:33 · src/server/scripts/seed.ts:57 — the 2 copies are spread across 2 files, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported. — src/server/scripts/migrate.ts:33
  • REDACTED:78 · REDACTED:118 — all 2 copies are in the same file, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported. — REDACTED:78
  • src/app/_components/TodoList.tsx:166 · src/app/_components/TodoList.tsx:184 · src/app/_components/TodoList.tsx:202 — all 3 copies are in the same file, and the CITED SPAN is a run of DECLARATIONS inside a construct — the members of a type, or the entries of an object or array literal — with no statement anywhere in it. Do not read this as an extract-a-helper row: nothing here executes, so there is no call site, and a call expression cannot stand where a member declaration or a literal's entry was. What repeats is a SHAPE, and which shape decides the move. Where the copies declare the same members, the repetition is a missing common ancestor: give it a base type, an interface both extend, a generic instantiated twice, or — where the copies are a literal's entries rather than a type's members — one shared constant each site spreads or refers to, so the set is written once. Where they declare DIFFERENT members and only the form is shared — a decorator and its options, an annotation, a registration table's keys — the form is prescribed by a framework or a schema rather than copied, and the only collapse available is to generate the declarations from that schema; where you do not own the generator, this is the cost of the framework and there is nothing to extract. Check which of the two it is before acting: these copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why the repetition is reported, but the sentence to act on is not the same in both cases. — src/app/_components/TodoList.tsx:166
  • src/app/not-found.tsx:9 · src/app/unauthorized/page.tsx:19 — the 2 copies are spread across 2 directories, so the shared home is a decision rather than an obvious spot: check first whether one of them already owns this behaviour, and otherwise put the extracted module somewhere all of the sites already reach rather than making one of them depend on another. — src/app/not-found.tsx:9
  • src/server/domain/repositories/user-repository.ts:97 · REDACTED:12 — the 2 copies are spread across 2 files, and the CITED SPAN is inside a TYPE DECLARATION, not executable code. There is no function to extract and no call site to call one from, so do not read this as an extract-a-helper row: the collapse a type offers is a generic — name the shape once, parameterised over the part that varies, and have each copy instantiate it. First check what actually differs between the copies: where they are a MATRIX of cases (one entry per input, differing precisely in the case each one pins), the repetition IS the enumeration and collapsing it would delete cases rather than de-duplicate anything — leave those alone. Reported because the copies that are not a matrix drift apart the first time only one of them is edited. — src/server/domain/repositories/user-repository.ts:97
  • src/server/infrastructure/repositories/drizzle-todo-repository.ts:228 · src/server/infrastructure/repositories/drizzle-todo-repository.ts:321 · src/server/infrastructure/repositories/drizzle-todo-repository.ts:367 — 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. — src/server/infrastructure/repositories/drizzle-todo-repository.ts:228
  • src/app/_components/TodoList.tsx:118 · src/app/_components/TodoList.tsx:127 — 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. — src/app/_components/TodoList.tsx:118
  • src/app/page.tsx:87 · src/app/page.tsx:99 · src/app/page.tsx:111 — 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. — src/app/page.tsx:87
  • src/app/profile/page.tsx:140 · src/app/profile/page.tsx:149 — 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. — src/app/profile/page.tsx:140
  • src/server/infrastructure/repositories/drizzle-role-repository.ts:326 · src/server/infrastructure/repositories/drizzle-role-repository.ts:345 · src/server/infrastructure/repositories/drizzle-role-repository.ts:387 — all 3 copies are in the same file, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported. — src/server/infrastructure/repositories/drizzle-role-repository.ts:326
  • REDACTED:635 · REDACTED:739 — 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. — REDACTED:635
  • src/server/domain/repositories/schemas/user-repository-schemas.ts:196 · src/server/schemas/user.ts:8 · src/server/schemas/user.ts:16 — the 3 copies are spread across 2 files, and the CITED SPAN is a run of DECLARATIONS inside a construct — the members of a type, or the entries of an object or array literal — with no statement anywhere in it. Do not read this as an extract-a-helper row: nothing here executes, so there is no call site, and a call expression cannot stand where a member declaration or a literal's entry was. What repeats is a SHAPE, and which shape decides the move. Where the copies declare the same members, the repetition is a missing common ancestor: give it a base type, an interface both extend, a generic instantiated twice, or — where the copies are a literal's entries rather than a type's members — one shared constant each site spreads or refers to, so the set is written once. Where they declare DIFFERENT members and only the form is shared — a decorator and its options, an annotation, a registration table's keys — the form is prescribed by a framework or a schema rather than copied, and the only collapse available is to generate the declarations from that schema; where you do not own the generator, this is the cost of the framework and there is nothing to extract. Check which of the two it is before acting: these copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why the repetition is reported, but the sentence to act on is not the same in both cases. — src/server/domain/repositories/schemas/user-repository-schemas.ts:196
  • src/server/infrastructure/repositories/drizzle-role-repository.ts:399 · REDACTED:233 — the 2 copies are spread across 2 files, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported. — src/server/infrastructure/repositories/drizzle-role-repository.ts:399

What to do

  • Act on each finding's own remediation rather than one rule: the move depends on what recurs. Where the copies are executable blocks, give the shared part one home and call it from each site; where they are declarations, a listing, a specialisation already delegating to its base, or one shape repeated per entity, there is no call site and the move is a shared type, a generated set or a factory — sometimes there is nothing to extract.
R2 · Cyclomatic Complexity9.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

React / JS · Code Health — Per-function cyclomatic/cognitive complexity from the token-level function scanner (D-386) — real branching, not a regex heuristic.

Method: Per-function cyclomatic/cognitive complexity from a token-level function scanner (real branching, not a regex heuristic), computed over every frontend function. Deterministic.

  • TodoList has cyclomatic complexity 16 and cognitive complexity 15; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive sits below cyclomatic here, so much of the count is breadth — arms side by side rather than stacked — and splitting per arm would leave a function per arm; group the work between the checks into named steps instead. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes. — src/app/_components/TodoList.tsx:26
  • updateTodo has cyclomatic complexity 12 and cognitive complexity 14; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive is at or above cyclomatic here, so the branching is nested or entangled rather than laid out side by side — extracting each decision into its own named function is the change that pays. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes. — src/server/services/todo-service.ts:179
  • (anonymous) has cyclomatic complexity 11 and cognitive complexity 19; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive is at or above cyclomatic here, so the branching is nested or entangled rather than laid out side by side — extracting each decision into its own named function is the change that pays. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes. — src/server/lib/error-handlers/trpc-error-handler.ts:25

What to do

  • Break down the listed branch-heavy functions; aim P95 cyclomatic ≤ 5.
R3 · Large Files8.4 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

React / JS · Code Health — How many source files exceed the large-file threshold.

Method: Components/modules exceeding the large-file threshold, counted exhaustively across the frontend source tree. Deterministic.

  • REDACTED has 726 significant lines (blank lines excluded), over the 400-line bar, and contains logic — a file this long is usually several responsibilities in one module. — REDACTED:1
  • src/server/infrastructure/repositories/drizzle-todo-repository.ts has 542 significant lines (blank lines excluded), over the 400-line bar, and contains logic — a file this long is usually several responsibilities in one module. — src/server/infrastructure/repositories/drizzle-todo-repository.ts:1
  • src/server/infrastructure/repositories/drizzle-role-repository.ts has 457 significant lines (blank lines excluded), over the 400-line bar, and contains logic — a file this long is usually several responsibilities in one module. — src/server/infrastructure/repositories/drizzle-role-repository.ts:1

What to do

  • Split each oversized file along the responsibilities already in it, into smaller focused modules in the same package.
R4 · Test Coverage0.0 / 10Critical✓ Tool-verified

React / JS · Readiness — Static test reachability (D-386): the share of production files reachable from any test via the import graph — measured without running anything.

Method: Static test reachability: the share of production files reachable from any test via the import graph — measured without running anything. Deterministic.

  • 0% of 58 production file(s) reachable from 0 test file(s) via the import graph — 'production' here is the RESIDUE: every source file left once tests, tooling, generated output, config, declarations and declaration-only modules, fixture corpora, type fixtures, behaviour-free data modules, re-export barrels, registration/constant data modules and service workers are set aside, so the percentage is taken over a smaller denominator than the workspace's file count

What to do

  • Add tests that import the unreached modules (directly or through their public entry).
R6 · Tooling6.6 / 10Strong✓ Tool-verified

React / JS · Readiness — Whether the project wires up test, lint and typecheck — detected from each package.json script's COMMAND (eslint / tsc / vitest / jest / playwright), not just its name, and corroborated against CI-workflow invocations so a tool run only in CI still counts.

Method: package.json scanned for test/lint/typecheck script wiring. Deterministic presence check.

  • test ✗ · lint ✓ · typecheck ✓ — read from this repository's package.json scripts and corroborated against its CI workflows. A script counts when its name or command matches the step: `test` for the suite, `lint` or `prettier` for linting, `typecheck`/`type-check`/`tsc` for type checking. ✗ therefore means no script or CI step under those names was found, NOT that the step is absent from your pipeline — a task invoked by a runner this check does not read, or named something else entirely, is not seen and is worth confirming before acting on a cross. A ✓ means the wiring is DECLARED — a script or CI step under those names exists. It is not a statement that the step passes, or that it runs at all: nothing here installs a dependency or executes a suite.

What to do

  • Add a test runner (vitest / jest / playwright) as package.json scripts and run them in CI.
R7 · Dead Code2.1 / 10Weak✓ Tool-verified

React / JS · Code Health — Files unreachable from every application/tooling/test entry point, and exports nothing imports (module-graph reachability, D-386).

Method: Dead code: files unreachable from every application/tooling/test entry point plus exports nothing imports, via module-graph reachability. Deterministic, exhaustive over the import graph.

  • Unreachable from the 11 application, 5 tooling and 0 test entry point(s) detected in this repo. Gate removals on `pnpm run build` — an undetected custom entry would make these reachable.
  • no import path from any entry point (11 application, 5 tooling, 0 test roots considered), and no other file in the scanned tree imports it — nothing in-repo names this module at all, which is the strongest form of this claim the import graph can make (×10) — src/server/infrastructure/repositories/drizzle-role-repository.ts, src/server/lib/auth-api.ts, src/server/lib/error-handlers/trpc-error-handler.ts, …
  • no import path from any entry point (11 application, 5 tooling, 0 test roots considered), but 1 in-repo import(s) from 1 other file(s) do name it (src/server/utils/index.ts) — every one of those referrers is itself unreachable, so this file is dead only as a member of that cluster: if any referrer is in fact alive, this row falls with it — src/server/utils/retry.ts
  • no import path from any entry point (11 application, 5 tooling, 0 test roots considered), but 1 in-repo import(s) from 1 other file(s) do name it (src/server/infrastructure/repositories/drizzle-role-repository.ts) — every one of those referrers is itself unreachable, so this file is dead only as a member of that cluster: if any referrer is in fact alive, this row falls with it — src/server/domain/repositories/role-repository.ts
  • Nothing imports this binding — it is safe to review for removal. (×27) — src/lib/auth-client.ts:8, src/lib/auth-client.ts:8, src/server/domain/repositories/schemas/todo-repository-schemas.ts:117, …

What to do

  • Delete the dead files and unused exports — every line is maintenance cost and rebuild-estimate inflation with zero runtime value.
R8 · Dependency Hygiene8.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

React / JS · Readiness — npm dependency truthfulness (D-386): unused dependencies, imports not declared anywhere, and type-/test-only packages shipped as production deps.

Method: npm dependency truthfulness: unused dependencies, imports declared nowhere, and type-/test-only packages shipped as production deps — from the manifest + import graph. Deterministic.

  • Declared in the root package.json but never imported anywhere in that package or its workspace members — no static import reaches it. Usually that is dead weight and attack surface, but two shapes are indistinguishable from source and are NOT dead: an optional or native peer that another dependency loads dynamically at runtime, and a package a build, docs or test step installs and invokes separately. Confirm which of the three this is before removing it. (×2)
  • Every import is type-only — move it to devDependencies. — src/server/context/app-context.ts:1

What to do

  • Remove unused dependencies, declare unlisted imports explicitly, and demote type-/test-only packages to devDependencies.
R9 · Circular Imports10.0 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

React / JS · Architecture — Import cycles in the module graph (D-386) — files that can only be understood and changed together.

Method: Import cycles in the module graph, detected exhaustively over JS/TS imports (the same cycle detection as the .NET coupling dimension). Deterministic.

X1 · Async correctness10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

X23 · Unguarded diagnostic materialisation10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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.

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

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

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

X3 · Exception handling10.0 / 10Exemplary○ Nothing flagged

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.

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.

X4 · Structured logging6.7 / 10Strong✓ Tool-verified

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

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

  • `error` at line 30 is handed a template literal with `${…}` substitutions as its message, so the logger receives one finished string — the values in it cannot be queried, filtered or aggregated as fields, and every occurrence reads as a different message. Pass the values beside a constant message instead: `logger.error({ orderId, status }, 'order status updated')` for pino and bunyan, `logger.error('order status updated', { orderId, status })` for winston. If these calls go through a NestJS `Logger` routed into pino, nestjs-pino forwards an object first argument as fields in the same way. — src/server/lib/error-handlers/trpc-error-handler.ts:30
  • `warn` at line 132 is handed a template literal with `${…}` substitutions as its message, so the logger receives one finished string — the values in it cannot be queried, filtered or aggregated as fields, and every occurrence reads as a different message. Pass the values beside a constant message instead: `logger.warn({ orderId, status }, 'order status updated')` for pino and bunyan, `logger.warn('order status updated', { orderId, status })` for winston. If these calls go through a NestJS `Logger` routed into pino, nestjs-pino forwards an object first argument as fields in the same way. — src/server/lib/error-handlers/trpc-error-handler.ts:132
  • `info` at line 170 is handed a template literal with `${…}` substitutions as its message, so the logger receives one finished string — the values in it cannot be queried, filtered or aggregated as fields, and every occurrence reads as a different message. Pass the values beside a constant message instead: `logger.info({ orderId, status }, 'order status updated')` for pino and bunyan, `logger.info('order status updated', { orderId, status })` for winston. If these calls go through a NestJS `Logger` routed into pino, nestjs-pino forwards an object first argument as fields in the same way. — src/server/lib/error-handlers/trpc-error-handler.ts:170

What to do

  • Interpolated log message defeats structured logging
X5 · Nullable reference types9.3 / 10Exemplary✓ Tool-verified

Other · Code Health — Whether strict null checking is enabled and not undermined by heavy `!` assertion — TypeScript's `strictNullChecks` (which `strict` turns on) is what makes `string` exclude `null` and `undefined`, and the postfix `!` is the operator that silences it.

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

  • ~1.7 `!` null assertions per 1k TypeScript source lines — 15 assertion(s) across the 8926 source line(s) of the 75 TypeScript file(s) read, which is the only code the operator asserts anything in (a `!` in a `.js` file is not this operator and was not counted, and one in a file whose null checking is off silences nothing). Densest: src/server/api/routers/todo.ts (14), src/server/utils/retry.ts (1). Each one tells the compiler to trust the author about null, suppressing the very diagnostic `strictNullChecks` exists to produce.

What to do

  • The findings name the configuration each number was taken from and, for the assertions, the files that hold them. Turn null checking on where it is off — `"strict": true` in the base tsconfig that the others extend switches `strictNullChecks` on with the rest of the family — and then resolve the assertions rather than adding to them. A `!` on a value the checker could show to be null is a promise the author cannot check from where they are standing, and each one is a `TypeError: Cannot read properties of null` waiting for the path that makes it true; where the value genuinely cannot be null, say something the checker can see instead (narrow it with a test, make the property required, drop the `?`).

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.

LensScoreRatingImpact
Code Health66%Adequate — gated by R7Capped at Fair by a Critical contributor — resolve it before relying on this lens.
Architecture76%Adequate — gated by D26Capped at Fair by a Critical contributor — resolve it before relying on this lens.
Maturity61%Adequate — gated by M2Capped at Fair by a Critical contributor — resolve it before relying on this lens.
Readiness14%Weak — gated by D9, R4, P1, P3, P5Capped at Fair by a Critical contributor — resolve it before relying on this lens.
Security29%Weak — gated by D30, C1, C2Capped at Fair by a Critical contributor — resolve it before relying on this lens.
Domain Modelling100%ExemplaryStrongest area.
Performance100%ExemplarySolid.
Not evidenced — 4 control(s) we could not find positive evidence for

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

  • C3 Audit Trail — Repo shows no audit-logging mechanism (an audit-log table or model, an ORM write hook that records changes — a TypeORM/MikroORM subscriber, a Sequelize or Mongoose hook, Prisma middleware — or a change-history plugin such as mongoose-history or sequelize-paper-trail) for sensitive changes — absence of evidence is not evidence of a working control. Record an audit trail in code (or document where it lives) so this dimension can be scored.
  • C4 Data Retention — Repo shows no data-retention / TTL / cleanup mechanism for personal data — absence of evidence is not evidence of a working control. Define retention periods and a purge/cleanup job (or TTL) in code, or document where retention is enforced, so this dimension can be scored.
  • C5 Data-Subject Rights — Repo shows no corroborated data-subject-rights mechanism (erasure / export-portability / consent) tied to a subject id or GDPR vocabulary — absence of evidence is not evidence of a working control. Implement erasure, data export/portability and consent tracking over the subject's records.
  • P6 Release Hygiene — not evidenced — no changelog, version stamp or semver release tag in the repo
Not included — 66 check(s) not relevant to this codebase

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

  • AC1 Text alternatives — Frontend below the scale floor (20 DOM element(s) < 25) — too little surface to assess accessibility.
  • AC2 Forms & labels — Frontend below the scale floor (20 DOM element(s) < 25) — too little surface to assess accessibility.
  • AC3 Page structure — Frontend below the scale floor (20 DOM element(s) < 25) — too little surface to assess accessibility.
  • AC4 Keyboard semantics — Frontend below the scale floor (20 DOM element(s) < 25) — too little surface to assess accessibility.
  • AC5 ARIA correctness — Frontend below the scale floor (20 DOM element(s) < 25) — too little surface to assess accessibility.
  • AC6 Visual & motion safety — Frontend below the scale floor (20 DOM element(s) < 25) — too little surface to assess accessibility.
  • AC7 A11y enforcement — Frontend below the scale floor (20 DOM element(s) < 25) — too little surface to assess accessibility.
  • AX1 Captive dependencies — Not applicable: this repository's JavaScript imports no dependency-injection container and defines no container of its own — nothing that both registers and resolves bindings, and nothing that names two lifetimes — so nothing holds one lifetime's instance while handing out another's; this repository's TypeScript imports no dependency-injection container and defines no container of its own — nothing that both registers and resolves bindings, and nothing that names two lifetimes — so nothing holds one lifetime's instance while handing out another's.
  • AX2 Stateful singletons — Not applicable: TypeScript/JavaScript runs each process's requests on one event loop, so no two requests write a shared object at the same instant (interleaving across an await is a different defect).
  • AX4 Dependency direction — not applicable to a transaction-script/CRUD architecture (the inward-dependency rule is for layered/clean styles)
  • AX7 Slice cohesion — not applicable — not a vertical-slice architecture
  • AX8 Test isolation — no test/production split to check
  • AX9 CQS / query purity — no CQRS query handlers detected — query purity is not applicable to this codebase
  • AXB2 Runtime readiness — Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score, so there is nothing missing here.
  • AXR1 Runtime accessibility — compose up failed (exit 18 — an image could not be pulled) — drizzle-gateway Pulling postgres Pulling postgres Error Get "https://registry-1.docker.io/v2/": Forbidden drizzle-gateway Error context canceled Error response from daemon: Get "https://registry-1.docker.io/v2/": Forbidden; the earlier `compose pull` step reported: postgres Pulling drizzle-gateway Pulling postgres Error Get "https://registry-1.docker.io/v2/": Forbidden drizzle-gateway Error context canceled Error response from daemon: Get "https://registry-1.docker.io/v2/": Forbidden; the runtime sandbox reaches registries only through the in-fence pull-through mirror, so an image the mirror does not carry cannot be fetched — this is a limit of our sandbox, not of your stack; runtime evidence skipped This is a statement about this run, not a statement about your application: nothing here says the surface is inaccessible, only that it was never rendered.
  • D10 Test Quality — No tests were found in the analyzed repository to assess for quality.
  • D11 Test Reliability — No test suite was found to re-run, so reliability couldn't be assessed. Two searches produced that zero and both came back empty: the classifier that reads the loaded workspace recognised no suite it could run, and a walk of the source on disk — which covers the JS/TS `*.test.*` and `*.spec.*` conventions and probes for a Pester suite — found no test source in any other ecosystem either. Neither search reaches a suite that is missing from the loaded workspace and carries no name either walk recognises, so this is 'no suite found by those two searches', not a verdict that the repository has none.
  • D16 Bus Factor — single-contributor repository — bus factor is not applicable
  • D18 Solution Shape — D18 scores the shape of a .NET solution; this repository has no .NET solution or project files, so the dimension does not apply.
  • D20 ADR Quality — N/A — this repo declares itself a template / kata / sample / demo; a formal ADR log is deferred to a real application built from it.
  • D22 Internal API Consistency — No intentionally-exposed public API to evaluate for consistency.
  • D23 Boundary Type-Coupling — No bounded-context organisation was detected either — neither a context-shaped layout, nor 2+ sibling source directories each declaring an aggregate root, nor 2+ projects each declaring an entity of their own. Declaring this codebase's bounded contexts (≥2) would let cross-boundary type coupling be assessed. Declare them in `.codehealth/config.yaml` at the repository root (create it if absent), mapping each context name to the module-path or namespace prefixes that belong to it — e.g. `architecture:` → `contexts:` → `Billing: ["src/billing", "Acme.Billing"]`, `Catalog: ["src/catalog", "Acme.Catalog"]`.
  • D24 Comment Value — No inline comments to assess — comment value is not applicable here.
  • D25 ADR Conformance — no ADRs to check
  • D27 Navigability — D27 counts a call into the standard library or a dependency as unresolved for this repository's language (.ts,.tsx), so too few call sites counted as resolved to assess navigability. Not scored: this is a gap in the analyzer, not a verdict about this repository.
  • D32 Data Compliance (PII/GDPR) — 2 file(s) were not parsed by semgrep — the PII/GDPR ruleset never ran over them
  • D34 Knowledge Freshness — too few commits to judge knowledge freshness
  • 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.
  • D4 Code Duplication — This repository's production source (.ts, .tsx) is not read by D4's token comparison, which compares .NET source: duplication in it is measured by R10 Code Duplication, the frontend lens's card running the same clone algorithm over the JS/TS token stream. Not scored here — read the R10 card for this repository's duplication.
  • D40 Network Egress Confinement — No Kubernetes/orchestration workloads found in the repository manifests; network egress policy is a cluster-native control that may live at the platform/firewall layer, so there is nothing to assess here.
  • D41 Kernel & Syscall Confinement — No Kubernetes/orchestration workloads found in the repository manifests; seccomp/AppArmor/SELinux confinement is a workload-level control, so there is nothing to assess here.
  • D42 Runtime Threat Enforcement — No Kubernetes/orchestration workloads found in the repository manifests; runtime threat-detection and admission-control policy are cluster-level controls, so there is nothing to assess here.
  • D5 Coupling — Not applicable — this npm 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 — This repo declares itself a template / kata / sample; tests are deferred to the application built from it, so coverage is not scored here.
  • DM1 Aggregate boundaries — not applicable: no DDD domain layer was detected (no aggregate, entity or value-object structure), so there is no domain model for this card to grade
  • DM10 One transaction, one aggregate — not applicable: no DDD domain layer was detected (no aggregate, entity or value-object structure), so there is no domain model for this card to grade
  • DM2 Strongly-typed ids — not applicable: no DDD domain layer was detected (no aggregate, entity or value-object structure), so there is no domain model for this card to grade
  • DM3 Integration-event coupling — not applicable: no DDD domain layer was detected (no aggregate, entity or value-object structure), so there is no domain model for this card to grade
  • DM4 Rich vs anemic model — not applicable: no DDD domain layer was detected (no aggregate, entity or value-object structure), so there is no domain model for this card to grade
  • DM5 Encapsulated state — not applicable: no DDD domain layer was detected (no aggregate, entity or value-object structure), so there is no domain model for this card to grade
  • DM7 Repository granularity — not applicable: no DDD domain layer was detected (no aggregate, entity or value-object structure), so there is no domain model for this card to grade
  • 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
  • P12 CI test-gate honesty — no CI workflow found
  • P7 Outbound HTTP resilience — not applicable — no HTTP server, API framework or worker entry point was found in the JavaScript/TypeScript source, so there is no service whose uptime a failing dependency could take down
  • P8 Schema migrations — Drizzle is declared, but the schema-migration mechanism could not be identified. Our limit, not a verdict on this repository.
  • P9 Domain vs controller coverage — no coverage report found on disk — produce a coverage report in a standard format (lcov — `vitest --coverage`, `jest --coverage`, `bun test --coverage --coverage-reporter=lcov`, or `nyc`) and commit it — a hosted scan measures a clone of the repository, so a report that exists only in a working tree, a CI runner's or your own, never reaches it; the artefact is commonly gitignored, so `git add -f` that one file (or un-ignore its path) and commit it alongside the code it measures, 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 tinybench, mitata, benchmark.js, benny or vitest `bench(...)` calls in files that import them (or `*.bench.*` files), or one of those in a package.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: TypeScript/JavaScript runs on a garbage-collected runtime that gives a program no allocation-control idiom to choose on a hot path — no pools, stack allocation or value types — so allocation awareness is not something this code can be rated on.
  • R11 Import Boundaries — No recognizable feature-sliced/layered src layout — boundary rules not applicable.
  • R5 Dependency Freshness — uses a pnpm lockfile — dependency freshness not measured here; JS/npm CVEs are scored in D30 (Dependency Vulnerabilities), which answers every ecosystem
  • S1 Web-Security Posture — Not assessed: 76 JavaScript/TypeScript file(s) were read for weak hashes and ciphers, key material fixed in the source, disabled TLS certificate validation and obsolete TLS versions, and none was found. That half of the dimension is clean, but it is not scored on its own: a C# repository with the same clean reading is scored on its server controls as well, or is N/A for having no web surface, and neither can be decided here. The server controls — HTTPS enforcement, HSTS, cookie flags, input validation — are NOT assessed for JavaScript/TypeScript: each is scored as an absence, an absence is only reportable over the production HTTP server, and in this ecosystem the file that opens the port is build output or a framework launcher rather than a file in the source tree. Their absence here is not a finding about this repository.
  • SC1 Supply-chain hygiene — Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score, so there is nothing missing here.
  • X10 Duplicated predicate — Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score, so there is nothing missing here.
  • X2 Cancellation propagation — not analysed — these correctness checks read a source model that was not loaded for this repository, because the repository is written in a language this check does not yet model, or because its projects failed to load. This is a gap in the analyzer, not a finding about this repository
  • X20 Mistyped argument guard — This check asks whether an argument guard reports an EMPTY value as a NULL one, which needs a language that throws a null-specific argument exception — .NET's ArgumentNullException, the JVM's NullPointerException, Dart's ArgumentError.notNull. This repository contains none of those languages: the ones it is written in have a single exception for a bad argument, so there is no pair of exceptions to confuse and nothing here for it to assess. Not a gap in the analyzer and not a finding about your code.
  • 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. TypeScript/JavaScript runs every callback on the one thread that owns its objects: a callback runs only when the body waiting on it has yielded, never alongside it, and a worker thread receives a COPY of what it is sent. A SharedArrayBuffer carries raw bytes, never an Array, Map or Set, so no 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 applicable: this check looks for a loop whose body adds to or removes from the very collection the loop is walking, invalidating the enumerator it holds, and in this repository's languages that cannot happen. JavaScript and TypeScript have no iterator that a change can invalidate: an `Array` is walked by index against its live length, and a `Map` or `Set` by the ECMAScript specification's live entry list, so a body that adds to, removes from or empties what it walks raises nothing — every loop form (`for…of`, `for…in`, `forEach`, `map`, `filter`, `reduce`, `entries()`) on every built-in collection (`Array`, `Map`, `Set`, plain objects, `URLSearchParams`, `Headers`, `FormData`) runs to completion. Such a loop can still skip an element or never end, which is a different defect and not the one this check asks about. Not a gap in the analyzer and not a finding about your code.
  • X32 Type resolved by simple name across every loaded assembly — This check is about how a .NET program searches the assemblies loaded into its process for a type, and this repository contains no .NET source, so there is nothing here for it to assess. Not a gap in the analyzer and not a finding about your code.
  • X6 Hand-rolled structured-format parsing — Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score, so there is nothing missing here.
  • X7 Silent fallback defaults — Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score, so there is nothing missing here.
  • X9 Subsumed condition operand — Advisory — this card reports evidence and never carries a score, so there is nothing missing here.

Appendix A — Findings (grouped)

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

Critical — 25 finding(s)
D30 · Dependency Vulnerabilities · High CVE · ×20
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
D30 · Dependency Vulnerabilities · Critical CVE · ×3
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
D29 · Static Analysis (SAST) · REDACTED · ×1
  • REDACTED
D31 · IaC & Container Security · High IaC · ×1
  • REDACTED
Serious — 99 finding(s)
D17 · Explicit Debt · TodoComment · ×8
  • TodoComment src/server/api/trpc.ts:154 — // TODO: Uncomment when userService is available — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
  • TodoComment src/server/domain/repositories/schemas/todo-repository-schemas.ts:48 — // TODO CREATE SCHEMAS — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
  • TodoComment src/server/domain/repositories/schemas/todo-repository-schemas.ts:65 — // TODO UPDATE SCHEMAS — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
  • TodoComment src/server/domain/repositories/types/todo-repository-types.ts:16 — // TODO CRUD TYPES — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
  • TodoComment src/server/domain/repositories/types/todo-repository-types.ts:37 — // TODO UPDATE TYPES - Dedicated Methods — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
  • TodoComment src/server/domain/repositories/types/todo-repository-types.ts:71 — // TODO QUERY TYPES — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
  • TodoComment src/server/domain/repositories/types/todo-repository-types.ts:106 — // TODO SPECIALIZED TYPES — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
  • TodoComment src/server/lib/auth.ts:58 — // TODO: Enable this if you need cross-domain cookies — source code is not a task system: move the work to your tracker and leave a reference instead (e.g. `// REF: #123`), so the task is planned where tasks live and the ticket links back to the code.
D29 · Static Analysis (SAST) · REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
D3 · God Classes · FunctionTooLong · ×6
  • FunctionTooLong: TodoList.TodoList src/app/_components/TodoList.tsx:26 — FunctionTooLong — TodoList runs 205 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 105 over it, 2.05× the bar. This is length, not branching: a long straight-line body scores low on complexity and is still read whole to change any part of it, so the complexity numbers beside this row neither confirm nor excuse it. To reduce it, extract each cohesive step of the body — the runs of statements that work on the same values and would earn the same name — into its own named unit, and have this one call them in order.
  • FunctionTooLong: Header.Header src/components/layout/Header.tsx:29 — FunctionTooLong — Header runs 187 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 87 over it, 1.87× the bar. This is length, not branching: a long straight-line body scores low on complexity and is still read whole to change any part of it, so the complexity numbers beside this row neither confirm nor excuse it. To reduce it, extract each cohesive step of the body — the runs of statements that work on the same values and would earn the same name — into its own named unit, and have this one call them in order.
  • FunctionTooLong: TodoItem.TodoItem src/app/_components/TodoItem.tsx:34 — FunctionTooLong — TodoItem runs 170 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 70 over it, 1.70× the bar. This is length, not branching: a long straight-line body scores low on complexity and is still read whole to change any part of it, so the complexity numbers beside this row neither confirm nor excuse it. To reduce it, extract each cohesive step of the body — the runs of statements that work on the same values and would earn the same name — into its own named unit, and have this one call them in order.
  • FunctionTooLong: RegisterForm.RegisterForm src/components/auth/RegisterForm.tsx:46 — FunctionTooLong — RegisterForm runs 122 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 22 over it, 1.22× the bar. This is length, not branching: a long straight-line body scores low on complexity and is still read whole to change any part of it, so the complexity numbers beside this row neither confirm nor excuse it. To reduce it, extract each cohesive step of the body — the runs of statements that work on the same values and would earn the same name — into its own named unit, and have this one call them in order.
  • FunctionTooLong: page.ProfileContent src/app/profile/page.tsx:25 — FunctionTooLong — ProfileContent runs 114 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 14 over it, 1.14× the bar. This is length, not branching: a long straight-line body scores low on complexity and is still read whole to change any part of it, so the complexity numbers beside this row neither confirm nor excuse it. To reduce it, extract each cohesive step of the body — the runs of statements that work on the same values and would earn the same name — into its own named unit, and have this one call them in order.
  • FunctionTooLong: AddTodoForm.AddTodoForm src/app/_components/AddTodoForm.tsx:21 — FunctionTooLong — AddTodoForm runs 106 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded) in one body. The bar is 100 significant lines; this is 6 over it, 1.06× 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.
D30 · Dependency Vulnerabilities · Medium CVE · ×3
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
R10 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (17 lines × 2 locations) · ×3
  • Duplicated block (17 lines × 2 locations) src/server/api/routers/todo.ts:120 — src/server/api/routers/todo.ts:120 · src/server/api/routers/todo.ts:180 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
  • Duplicated block (17 lines × 2 locations) src/server/infrastructure/repositories/drizzle-todo-repository.ts:110 — src/server/infrastructure/repositories/drizzle-todo-repository.ts:110 · src/server/infrastructure/repositories/drizzle-todo-repository.ts:155 — all 2 copies are in the same file, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported.
  • Duplicated block (17 lines × 2 locations) src/server/lib/auth-api.ts:122 — src/server/lib/auth-api.ts:122 · src/server/lib/auth-api.ts:143 — 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.
R10 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (13 lines × 2 locations) · ×3
  • Duplicated block (13 lines × 2 locations) src/app/error.tsx:19 — src/app/error.tsx:19 · src/app/unauthorized/page.tsx:7 — the 2 copies are spread across 2 directories, so the shared home is a decision rather than an obvious spot: check first whether one of them already owns this behaviour, and otherwise put the extracted module somewhere all of the sites already reach rather than making one of them depend on another.
  • Duplicated block (13 lines × 2 locations) REDACTED:95 — REDACTED:95 · REDACTED:150 — all 2 copies are in the same file, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported.
  • Duplicated block (13 lines × 2 locations) src/server/services/todo-service.ts:55 — src/server/services/todo-service.ts:55 · src/server/services/todo-service.ts:197 — 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.
R10 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (12 lines × 2 locations) · ×3
  • Duplicated block (12 lines × 2 locations) src/server/infrastructure/repositories/drizzle-role-repository.ts:300 — src/server/infrastructure/repositories/drizzle-role-repository.ts:300 · src/server/infrastructure/repositories/drizzle-role-repository.ts:327 — all 2 copies are in the same file, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported.
  • Duplicated block (12 lines × 2 locations) src/server/scripts/migrate.ts:33 — src/server/scripts/migrate.ts:33 · src/server/scripts/seed.ts:57 — the 2 copies are spread across 2 files, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported.
  • Duplicated block (12 lines × 2 locations) REDACTED:78 — REDACTED:78 · REDACTED:118 — all 2 copies are in the same file, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported.
D12 · Dependency Hygiene · Deprecated · ×2
  • Deprecated: next package.json:30 — next 15.4.5, declared in package.json, is marked deprecated by its publisher: "This version has a security vulnerability. Please upgrade to a patched version. See https://nextjs.org/blog/[CVE redacted] for more details.". Replace it with the package or version that message names, or record why this one must stay.
  • Deprecated: eslint package.json:60 — eslint 9.32.0, declared in package.json, is marked deprecated by its publisher: "This version is no longer supported. Please see https://eslint.org/version-support for other options.". Replace it with the package or version that message names, or record why this one must stay.
D30 · Dependency Vulnerabilities · Medium vulnerability · ×2
  • REDACTED
  • REDACTED
R10 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (16 lines × 2 locations) · ×2
  • Duplicated block (16 lines × 2 locations) src/server/api/routers/todo.ts:218 — src/server/api/routers/todo.ts:218 · src/server/api/routers/todo.ts:259 — all 2 copies are in the same file, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported.
  • Duplicated block (16 lines × 2 locations) src/server/infrastructure/repositories/drizzle-role-repository.ts:481 — src/server/infrastructure/repositories/drizzle-role-repository.ts:481 · src/server/infrastructure/repositories/drizzle-role-repository.ts:503 — 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.
R10 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (13 lines × 5 locations) · ×2
  • Duplicated block (13 lines × 5 locations) src/server/infrastructure/repositories/drizzle-todo-repository.ts:167 — src/server/infrastructure/repositories/drizzle-todo-repository.ts:167 · src/server/infrastructure/repositories/drizzle-todo-repository.ts:211 · src/server/infrastructure/repositories/drizzle-todo-repository.ts:259 · src/server/infrastructure/repositories/drizzle-todo-repository.ts:306 · +1 more site(s) not listed — all 5 copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from every one of those sites — resolving only two of them leaves the rest to drift apart the first time one is edited.
  • Duplicated block (13 lines × 5 locations) src/server/infrastructure/repositories/drizzle-todo-repository.ts:530 — src/server/infrastructure/repositories/drizzle-todo-repository.ts:530 · src/server/services/todo-service.ts:163 · src/server/services/todo-service.ts:239 · src/server/services/todo-service.ts:273 · +1 more site(s) not listed — the 5 copies are spread across 2 files, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported.
R10 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (11 lines × 3 locations) · ×2
  • Duplicated block (11 lines × 3 locations) src/app/_components/TodoList.tsx:166 — src/app/_components/TodoList.tsx:166 · src/app/_components/TodoList.tsx:184 · src/app/_components/TodoList.tsx:202 — all 3 copies are in the same file, and the CITED SPAN is a run of DECLARATIONS inside a construct — the members of a type, or the entries of an object or array literal — with no statement anywhere in it. Do not read this as an extract-a-helper row: nothing here executes, so there is no call site, and a call expression cannot stand where a member declaration or a literal's entry was. What repeats is a SHAPE, and which shape decides the move. Where the copies declare the same members, the repetition is a missing common ancestor: give it a base type, an interface both extend, a generic instantiated twice, or — where the copies are a literal's entries rather than a type's members — one shared constant each site spreads or refers to, so the set is written once. Where they declare DIFFERENT members and only the form is shared — a decorator and its options, an annotation, a registration table's keys — the form is prescribed by a framework or a schema rather than copied, and the only collapse available is to generate the declarations from that schema; where you do not own the generator, this is the cost of the framework and there is nothing to extract. Check which of the two it is before acting: these copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why the repetition is reported, but the sentence to act on is not the same in both cases.
  • Duplicated block (11 lines × 3 locations) src/server/infrastructure/repositories/drizzle-todo-repository.ts:228 — src/server/infrastructure/repositories/drizzle-todo-repository.ts:228 · src/server/infrastructure/repositories/drizzle-todo-repository.ts:321 · src/server/infrastructure/repositories/drizzle-todo-repository.ts:367 — 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.
R10 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (11 lines × 2 locations) · ×2
  • Duplicated block (11 lines × 2 locations) src/app/not-found.tsx:9 — src/app/not-found.tsx:9 · src/app/unauthorized/page.tsx:19 — the 2 copies are spread across 2 directories, so the shared home is a decision rather than an obvious spot: check first whether one of them already owns this behaviour, and otherwise put the extracted module somewhere all of the sites already reach rather than making one of them depend on another.
  • Duplicated block (11 lines × 2 locations) src/server/domain/repositories/user-repository.ts:97 — src/server/domain/repositories/user-repository.ts:97 · REDACTED:12 — the 2 copies are spread across 2 files, and the CITED SPAN is inside a TYPE DECLARATION, not executable code. There is no function to extract and no call site to call one from, so do not read this as an extract-a-helper row: the collapse a type offers is a generic — name the shape once, parameterised over the part that varies, and have each copy instantiate it. First check what actually differs between the copies: where they are a MATRIX of cases (one entry per input, differing precisely in the case each one pins), the repetition IS the enumeration and collapsing it would delete cases rather than de-duplicate anything — leave those alone. Reported because the copies that are not a matrix drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
R10 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (9 lines × 2 locations) · ×2
  • Duplicated block (9 lines × 2 locations) src/app/_components/TodoList.tsx:118 — src/app/_components/TodoList.tsx:118 · src/app/_components/TodoList.tsx:127 — both copies are in the same file, so extract the block into one function there and call it from each site — the copies drift apart the first time only one of them is edited.
  • Duplicated block (9 lines × 2 locations) src/app/profile/page.tsx:140 — src/app/profile/page.tsx:140 · src/app/profile/page.tsx:149 — 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.
C1 · Data Protection · No data-protection/encryption · ×1
  • No data-protection/encryption src/server/infrastructure/db/schema/user.ts:12 — No encryption usage (node:crypto createCipheriv, Web Crypto subtle.encrypt, crypto-js AES, tweetnacl/libsodium secretbox, a column-encryption layer such as typeorm-encrypted, prisma-field-encryption or mongoose-field-encryption, or MongoDB client-side field-level encryption) was found, and this repository persists personal data in the model cited here — sensitive data at rest may be unprotected. If TDE/KMS/vault is delegated to infrastructure, ignore.
D1 · Cyclomatic Complexity · TodoList.TodoList (cyclomatic 16) · ×1
  • TodoList.TodoList (cyclomatic 16) src/app/_components/TodoList.tsx:26 — TodoList.TodoList has cyclomatic complexity 16 (threshold 15). Of this number, 14 points are the body's own statements and 2 belong to one function literal inside it that branches. To reduce it, split the body: these branches sit side by side rather than nested inside one another, so extracting each one on its own would leave a function per branch. Group the statements between the checks into named steps and move each step into its own function, so the body reads as a short sequence of named stages.
D15 · Churn × Complexity Hotspots · Hotspot · ×1
  • Hotspot: src/app/_components/TodoList.tsx src/app/_components/TodoList.tsx:26 — src/app/_components/TodoList.tsx changed 3 times in last 90 days, and the most complex body those changes touched has cyclomatic complexity 16 in TodoList.TodoList at line 26. 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 2025-06-09..2025-09-07, the 90 days ending at the analysed commit. Reproduce with `git log --since='2025-06-09 15:19:41 +07:00' --until='2025-09-07 15:19:41 +07:00' --full-history --no-merges -- src/app/_components/TodoList.tsx`: merges are excluded because a merge re-states changes already counted at their own commits, and history is NOT path-simplified because a change that reached the file through a merged branch is still a change to it. That command counts raw commits and can read HIGHER than this row, which counts a cherry-picked re-land, and a revert together with the commit it undoes, once each — a difference of several commits on a file whose history was re-landed or reverted inside the window.
D2 · Cognitive Complexity · trpc-error-handler.handleServiceError (cognitive 19) · ×1
  • trpc-error-handler.handleServiceError (cognitive 19) src/server/lib/error-handlers/trpc-error-handler.ts:20 — trpc-error-handler.handleServiceError has cognitive complexity 19 (threshold 15). Drivers by points: if/else 10 (19 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.
D3 · God Classes · ClassTooLong · ×1
  • ClassTooLong: DrizzleUserRepository REDACTED:42 — ClassTooLong — 474 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded), 18 methods. The bar is 400 significant lines; this is 74 over it, 1.19× the bar. To reduce it, group the members that share the same data into a smaller type of their own and delegate to it, so no single type carries every responsibility.
D3 · God Classes · FileTooLong · ×1
  • FileTooLong: REDACTED REDACTED — FileTooLong — 501 significant lines (blank, comment-only and punctuation-only lines excluded), about 95% of them inside a single declaration: DrizzleUserRepository (42-824). The bar is 500 significant lines; this is 1 over it, 1.00× 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.
D31 · IaC & Container Security · Medium IaC · ×1
  • REDACTED
D6 · Cohesion (LCOM4) · Low cohesion · ×1
  • Low cohesion: AuthUserAPI (LCOM4 4) src/server/lib/auth-api.ts:53 — AuthUserAPI's methods fall into 4 groups that share no field and call none of each other, against a bar of more than 3 for this run (LCOM4, configurable — your repository's bar is the one quoted here). Each group is a set of methods reachable from one another through shared fields or direct calls, so 4 groups means the type has that many internally-connected clusters with nothing tying them together. Types whose shape makes a high count expected — and which would otherwise dominate this list — are excluded before this row is raised, so this is a genuine split candidate rather than a metric reading. It is still a shape, not a defect: confirm the groups match responsibilities you can name before splitting.
P1 · CI/CD gates · No CI pipeline · ×1
  • No CI pipeline — No CI workflow found (.github/workflows, azure-pipelines.yml, .gitlab-ci.yml, …) — changes aren't gated by an automated build/test.
P5 · DR & Backup · No DR/backup evidence · ×1
  • No DR/backup evidence — A persistence guard (data volume / purge-protection) was found, but no backup, geo-recovery or RTO/RPO controls were evidenced — a volume that survives a container recreate is not a tested restore from catastrophic loss.
R10 · Code Duplication · Duplication concentrated across 4 sibling directories (5 clone groups) · ×1
  • Duplication concentrated across 4 sibling directories (5 clone groups) src/server/infrastructure/repositories/drizzle-todo-repository.ts:566 — 5 duplicated blocks under src/server/ have copies in at least two of the sibling directories domain, infrastructure, schemas, services — 4 of them are reported below, and 1 is counted here but not reported individually: those copies match on shape but no longer clear R10's bar for an individually reported row — either they kept neither their own names nor their values, or what was copied is too small to stand on its own (it reports near-exact duplication only, and only of substantial extent). What this row states is the concentration, which the detector measured over all 5 and which does not depend on how exactly each block's copies still match. That concentration is one structural fact, not 5 local ones: the siblings replicate behaviour none of them owns, which is the shape of a missing shared module — a common library every sibling imports — rather than 5 separate extractions. Check first whether the siblings are deliberately standalone deliverables (scaffold templates, demo apps that must stay copy-pasteable); where they are, the duplication is the design and the per-block rows are the ones to act on.
R10 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block with local edits (92 matched lines × 2 locations) · ×1
  • Duplicated block with local edits (92 matched lines × 2 locations) src/components/auth/LoginForm.tsx:28 — src/components/auth/LoginForm.tsx:28 · src/components/auth/RegisterForm.tsx:46 — the two spans are one implementation copied and then locally edited — 527 tokens are still identical, in the same order in both files, with only local edits between them. The copies have already begun to drift, which is this row's finding: an edit made to one and not the other changes behaviour silently. Diff the two spans first to learn what genuinely differs, then extract the shared core into one module both sites use, passing the differences in as parameters — or, if one copy exists only because the other could not be imported from its context, make one of them the single source the other is generated or re-exported from. If one copy is no longer reachable, delete it rather than letting it shadow the live one.
R10 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (62 lines × 2 locations) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (62 lines × 2 locations) REDACTED:62 — REDACTED:62 · REDACTED:532 — 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.
R10 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block with local edits (44 matched lines × 2 locations) · ×1
  • Duplicated block with local edits (44 matched lines × 2 locations) src/app/_components/AppHeader.tsx:21 — src/app/_components/AppHeader.tsx:21 · src/components/layout/Header.tsx:33 — the two spans are one implementation copied and then locally edited — 204 tokens are still identical, in the same order in both files, with only local edits between them. The copies have already begun to drift, which is this row's finding: an edit made to one and not the other changes behaviour silently. Diff the two spans first to learn what genuinely differs, then extract the shared core into one module both sites use, passing the differences in as parameters — or, if one copy exists only because the other could not be imported from its context, make one of them the single source the other is generated or re-exported from. If one copy is no longer reachable, delete it rather than letting it shadow the live one.
R10 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block with local edits (32 matched lines × 2 locations) · ×1
  • Duplicated block with local edits (32 matched lines × 2 locations) src/server/api/routers/todo.ts:18 — src/server/api/routers/todo.ts:18 · src/server/api/routers/todo.ts:97 — the two spans are one implementation copied and then locally edited — 224 tokens are still identical, in the same order in both spans, with only local edits between them. The copies have already begun to drift, which is this row's finding: an edit made to one and not the other changes behaviour silently. Diff the two spans first to learn what genuinely differs, then extract the shared core into one module both sites use, passing the differences in as parameters — or, if one copy exists only because the other could not be imported from its context, make one of them the single source the other is generated or re-exported from. If one copy is no longer reachable, delete it rather than letting it shadow the live one.
R10 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (26 lines × 4 locations) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (26 lines × 4 locations) src/server/infrastructure/repositories/drizzle-todo-repository.ts:195 — src/server/infrastructure/repositories/drizzle-todo-repository.ts:195 · src/server/infrastructure/repositories/drizzle-todo-repository.ts:243 · src/server/infrastructure/repositories/drizzle-todo-repository.ts:290 · src/server/infrastructure/repositories/drizzle-todo-repository.ts:336 — all 4 copies are in the same file, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported.
R10 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (26 lines × 8 locations) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (26 lines × 8 locations) REDACTED:149 — REDACTED:149 · REDACTED:193 · REDACTED:259 · REDACTED:299 · +4 more site(s) not listed — all 8 copies are in the same file, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported.
R10 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (20 lines × 2 locations) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (20 lines × 2 locations) src/server/infrastructure/repositories/drizzle-role-repository.ts:100 — src/server/infrastructure/repositories/drizzle-role-repository.ts:100 · src/server/infrastructure/repositories/drizzle-role-repository.ts:126 — all 2 copies are in the same file, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported.
R10 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (19 lines × 2 locations) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (19 lines × 2 locations) src/server/infrastructure/repositories/drizzle-role-repository.ts:212 — src/server/infrastructure/repositories/drizzle-role-repository.ts:212 · src/server/infrastructure/repositories/drizzle-role-repository.ts:251 — 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.
R10 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (18 lines × 2 locations) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (18 lines × 2 locations) src/app/login/page.tsx:5 — src/app/login/page.tsx:5 · src/app/register/page.tsx:5 — the 2 copies are spread across 2 directories, so the shared home is a decision rather than an obvious spot: check first whether one of them already owns this behaviour, and otherwise put the extracted module somewhere all of the sites already reach rather than making one of them depend on another.
R10 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (18 lines × 3 locations) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (18 lines × 3 locations) src/server/infrastructure/repositories/drizzle-todo-repository.ts:263 — src/server/infrastructure/repositories/drizzle-todo-repository.ts:263 · src/server/infrastructure/repositories/drizzle-todo-repository.ts:310 · src/server/infrastructure/repositories/drizzle-todo-repository.ts:356 — all 3 copies are in the same file, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported.
R10 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (15 lines × 3 locations) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (15 lines × 3 locations) src/server/api/routers/todo.ts:161 — src/server/api/routers/todo.ts:161 · src/server/api/routers/todo.ts:212 · src/server/api/routers/todo.ts:253 — all 3 copies are in the same file, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported.
R10 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (15 lines × 2 locations) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (15 lines × 2 locations) src/server/services/todo-service.ts:235 — src/server/services/todo-service.ts:235 · src/server/services/todo-service.ts:300 — 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.
R10 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (14 lines × 4 locations) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (14 lines × 4 locations) src/app/_components/AddTodoForm.tsx:37 — src/app/_components/AddTodoForm.tsx:37 · src/app/_components/TodoItem.tsx:47 · src/app/_components/TodoItem.tsx:68 · src/app/_components/TodoItem.tsx:88 — the 4 copies are spread across 2 files, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported.
R10 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (13 lines × 7 locations) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (13 lines × 7 locations) src/server/infrastructure/repositories/drizzle-todo-repository.ts:142 — src/server/infrastructure/repositories/drizzle-todo-repository.ts:142 · src/server/infrastructure/repositories/drizzle-todo-repository.ts:191 · src/server/infrastructure/repositories/drizzle-todo-repository.ts:239 · src/server/infrastructure/repositories/drizzle-todo-repository.ts:286 · +3 more site(s) not listed — all 7 copies are in the same file, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported.
R10 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (12 lines × 3 locations) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (12 lines × 3 locations) src/server/infrastructure/repositories/drizzle-todo-repository.ts:496 — src/server/infrastructure/repositories/drizzle-todo-repository.ts:496 · src/server/infrastructure/repositories/drizzle-todo-repository.ts:570 · src/server/services/todo-service.ts:128 — the 3 copies are spread across 2 files, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported.
R10 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (9 lines × 3 locations) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (9 lines × 3 locations) src/app/page.tsx:87 — src/app/page.tsx:87 · src/app/page.tsx:99 · src/app/page.tsx:111 — 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.
R10 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (8 lines × 3 locations) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (8 lines × 3 locations) src/server/infrastructure/repositories/drizzle-role-repository.ts:326 — src/server/infrastructure/repositories/drizzle-role-repository.ts:326 · src/server/infrastructure/repositories/drizzle-role-repository.ts:345 · src/server/infrastructure/repositories/drizzle-role-repository.ts:387 — all 3 copies are in the same file, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported.
R10 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (7 lines × 2 locations) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (7 lines × 2 locations) REDACTED:635 — REDACTED:635 · REDACTED:739 — 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.
R10 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (6 lines × 3 locations) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (6 lines × 3 locations) src/server/domain/repositories/schemas/user-repository-schemas.ts:196 — src/server/domain/repositories/schemas/user-repository-schemas.ts:196 · src/server/schemas/user.ts:8 · src/server/schemas/user.ts:16 — the 3 copies are spread across 2 files, and the CITED SPAN is a run of DECLARATIONS inside a construct — the members of a type, or the entries of an object or array literal — with no statement anywhere in it. Do not read this as an extract-a-helper row: nothing here executes, so there is no call site, and a call expression cannot stand where a member declaration or a literal's entry was. What repeats is a SHAPE, and which shape decides the move. Where the copies declare the same members, the repetition is a missing common ancestor: give it a base type, an interface both extend, a generic instantiated twice, or — where the copies are a literal's entries rather than a type's members — one shared constant each site spreads or refers to, so the set is written once. Where they declare DIFFERENT members and only the form is shared — a decorator and its options, an annotation, a registration table's keys — the form is prescribed by a framework or a schema rather than copied, and the only collapse available is to generate the declarations from that schema; where you do not own the generator, this is the cost of the framework and there is nothing to extract. Check which of the two it is before acting: these copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why the repetition is reported, but the sentence to act on is not the same in both cases.
R10 · Code Duplication · Duplicated block (6 lines × 2 locations) · ×1
  • Duplicated block (6 lines × 2 locations) src/server/infrastructure/repositories/drizzle-role-repository.ts:399 — src/server/infrastructure/repositories/drizzle-role-repository.ts:399 · REDACTED:233 — the 2 copies are spread across 2 files, and the CITED SPAN is not a self-contained block — it runs from inside one construct into the next (the tail of a branch plus the head of the following one, a run of switch arms, the end of a declaration plus the list that follows it) rather than covering a whole unit. So do not lift these lines literally: no call can be substituted for a half-open construct. Extract the enclosing repeated UNIT instead — the whole function, component or branch these lines sit in — and where the repetition IS the construct (a run of switch arms, a stack of near-identical declarations) replace it with one table or registry looked up by key rather than a helper each arm calls. The copies still drift apart the first time only one of them is edited, which is why this is reported.
R2 · Cyclomatic Complexity · Complex function TodoList (cyclomatic 16, cognitive 15) · ×1
  • Complex function TodoList (cyclomatic 16, cognitive 15) src/app/_components/TodoList.tsx:26 — TodoList has cyclomatic complexity 16 and cognitive complexity 15; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive sits below cyclomatic here, so much of the count is breadth — arms side by side rather than stacked — and splitting per arm would leave a function per arm; group the work between the checks into named steps instead. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes.
R2 · Cyclomatic Complexity · Complex function updateTodo (cyclomatic 12, cognitive 14) · ×1
  • Complex function updateTodo (cyclomatic 12, cognitive 14) src/server/services/todo-service.ts:179 — updateTodo has cyclomatic complexity 12 and cognitive complexity 14; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive is at or above cyclomatic here, so the branching is nested or entangled rather than laid out side by side — extracting each decision into its own named function is the change that pays. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes.
R2 · Cyclomatic Complexity · Complex function (anonymous) (cyclomatic 11, cognitive 19) · ×1
  • Complex function (anonymous) (cyclomatic 11, cognitive 19) src/server/lib/error-handlers/trpc-error-handler.ts:25 — (anonymous) has cyclomatic complexity 11 and cognitive complexity 19; this row is raised above a cyclomatic bar of 10. The two numbers answer different questions and the gap between them is what decides whether to act: cyclomatic counts the independent arms through the body, cognitive counts what it costs to hold them in your head, so nesting and mixed boolean chains raise it while a flat run of independent arms does not. Cognitive is at or above cyclomatic here, so the branching is nested or entangled rather than laid out side by side — extracting each decision into its own named function is the change that pays. Measured by this repository's own parse of the file, so a body assembled at runtime, or generated, is counted as written rather than as it executes.
R3 · Large Files · REDACTED · ×1
  • REDACTED: 726 lines of code REDACTED:1 — REDACTED has 726 significant lines (blank lines excluded), over the 400-line bar, and contains logic — a file this long is usually several responsibilities in one module.
R3 · Large Files · src/server/infrastructure/repositories/drizzle-todo-repository.ts · ×1
  • src/server/infrastructure/repositories/drizzle-todo-repository.ts: 542 lines of code src/server/infrastructure/repositories/drizzle-todo-repository.ts:1 — src/server/infrastructure/repositories/drizzle-todo-repository.ts has 542 significant lines (blank lines excluded), over the 400-line bar, and contains logic — a file this long is usually several responsibilities in one module.
R3 · Large Files · src/server/infrastructure/repositories/drizzle-role-repository.ts · ×1
  • src/server/infrastructure/repositories/drizzle-role-repository.ts: 457 lines of code src/server/infrastructure/repositories/drizzle-role-repository.ts:1 — src/server/infrastructure/repositories/drizzle-role-repository.ts has 457 significant lines (blank lines excluded), over the 400-line bar, and contains logic — a file this long is usually several responsibilities in one module.
R4 · Test Coverage · Test Coverage · ×1
  • Test Coverage — 0% of 58 production file(s) reachable from 0 test file(s) via the import graph — 'production' here is the RESIDUE: every source file left once tests, tooling, generated output, config, declarations and declaration-only modules, fixture corpora, type fixtures, behaviour-free data modules, re-export barrels, registration/constant data modules and service workers are set aside, so the percentage is taken over a smaller denominator than the workspace's file count
R6 · Tooling · No test script · ×1
  • No test script — test ✗ · lint ✓ · typecheck ✓ — read from this repository's package.json scripts and corroborated against its CI workflows. A script counts when its name or command matches the step: `test` for the suite, `lint` or `prettier` for linting, `typecheck`/`type-check`/`tsc` for type checking. ✗ therefore means no script or CI step under those names was found, NOT that the step is absent from your pipeline — a task invoked by a runner this check does not read, or named something else entirely, is not seen and is worth confirming before acting on a cross. A ✓ means the wiring is DECLARED — a script or CI step under those names exists. It is not a statement that the step passes, or that it runs at all: nothing here installs a dependency or executes a suite.
R7 · Dead Code · Dead file (~556 LoC) · ×1
  • Dead file (~556 LoC) src/server/infrastructure/repositories/drizzle-role-repository.ts — no import path from any entry point (11 application, 5 tooling, 0 test roots considered), and no other file in the scanned tree imports it — nothing in-repo names this module at all, which is the strongest form of this claim the import graph can make
R7 · Dead Code · Dead file (~225 LoC) · ×1
  • Dead file (~225 LoC) src/server/lib/auth-api.ts — no import path from any entry point (11 application, 5 tooling, 0 test roots considered), and no other file in the scanned tree imports it — nothing in-repo names this module at all, which is the strongest form of this claim the import graph can make
R7 · Dead Code · Dead file (~192 LoC) · ×1
  • Dead file (~192 LoC) src/server/utils/retry.ts — no import path from any entry point (11 application, 5 tooling, 0 test roots considered), but 1 in-repo import(s) from 1 other file(s) do name it (src/server/utils/index.ts) — every one of those referrers is itself unreachable, so this file is dead only as a member of that cluster: if any referrer is in fact alive, this row falls with it
R7 · Dead Code · Dead file (~174 LoC) · ×1
  • Dead file (~174 LoC) src/server/lib/error-handlers/trpc-error-handler.ts — no import path from any entry point (11 application, 5 tooling, 0 test roots considered), and no other file in the scanned tree imports it — nothing in-repo names this module at all, which is the strongest form of this claim the import graph can make
R7 · Dead Code · Dead file (~140 LoC) · ×1
  • Dead file (~140 LoC) src/server/domain/repositories/role-repository.ts — no import path from any entry point (11 application, 5 tooling, 0 test roots considered), but 1 in-repo import(s) from 1 other file(s) do name it (src/server/infrastructure/repositories/drizzle-role-repository.ts) — every one of those referrers is itself unreachable, so this file is dead only as a member of that cluster: if any referrer is in fact alive, this row falls with it
R7 · Dead Code · Dead file (~85 LoC) · ×1
  • Dead file (~85 LoC) src/server/types/auth-types.ts — no import path from any entry point (11 application, 5 tooling, 0 test roots considered), and no other file in the scanned tree imports it — nothing in-repo names this module at all, which is the strongest form of this claim the import graph can make
R7 · Dead Code · Dead file (~48 LoC) · ×1
  • Dead file (~48 LoC) src/server/scripts/migrate.ts — no import path from any entry point (11 application, 5 tooling, 0 test roots considered), and no other file in the scanned tree imports it — nothing in-repo names this module at all, which is the strongest form of this claim the import graph can make
R7 · Dead Code · Dead file (~30 LoC) · ×1
  • Dead file (~30 LoC) src/trpc/server.ts — no import path from any entry point (11 application, 5 tooling, 0 test roots considered), and no other file in the scanned tree imports it — nothing in-repo names this module at all, which is the strongest form of this claim the import graph can make
R7 · Dead Code · Dead file (~13 LoC) · ×1
  • Dead file (~13 LoC) src/server/lib/constants.ts — no import path from any entry point (11 application, 5 tooling, 0 test roots considered), and no other file in the scanned tree imports it — nothing in-repo names this module at all, which is the strongest form of this claim the import graph can make
R7 · Dead Code · Dead file (~10 LoC) · ×1
  • Dead file (~10 LoC) src/server/infrastructure/logging/pino-logger-factory.ts — no import path from any entry point (11 application, 5 tooling, 0 test roots considered), and no other file in the scanned tree imports it — nothing in-repo names this module at all, which is the strongest form of this claim the import graph can make
R7 · Dead Code · Dead file (~5 LoC) · ×1
  • Dead file (~5 LoC) src/server/utils/index.ts — no import path from any entry point (11 application, 5 tooling, 0 test roots considered), and no other file in the scanned tree imports it — nothing in-repo names this module at all, which is the strongest form of this claim the import graph can make
R7 · Dead Code · Dead file (~3 LoC) · ×1
  • Dead file (~3 LoC) src/server/infrastructure/index.ts — no import path from any entry point (11 application, 5 tooling, 0 test roots considered), and no other file in the scanned tree imports it — nothing in-repo names this module at all, which is the strongest form of this claim the import graph can make
R8 · Dependency Hygiene · Unused dependency '@thaitype/reorder' · ×1
  • Unused dependency '@thaitype/reorder' — Declared in the root package.json but never imported anywhere in that package or its workspace members — no static import reaches it. Usually that is dead weight and attack surface, but two shapes are indistinguishable from source and are NOT dead: an optional or native peer that another dependency loads dynamically at runtime, and a package a build, docs or test step installs and invokes separately. Confirm which of the three this is before removing it.
R8 · Dependency Hygiene · Unused dependency 'jsonwebtoken' · ×1
  • Unused dependency 'jsonwebtoken' — Declared in the root package.json but never imported anywhere in that package or its workspace members — no static import reaches it. Usually that is dead weight and attack surface, but two shapes are indistinguishable from source and are NOT dead: an optional or native peer that another dependency loads dynamically at runtime, and a package a build, docs or test step installs and invokes separately. Confirm which of the three this is before removing it.
Minor — 58 finding(s)
P2 · Observability · Console output used as the logging channel · ×14
  • Console output used as the logging channel src/app/error.tsx:15 — `src/app/error.tsx` reports through `console.*` at line 15 although other files in its module log through a logger. Console lines carry no level, fields or correlation and never reach the log pipeline.
  • Console output used as the logging channel src/app/api/trpc/[trpc]/route.ts:27 — `src/app/api/trpc/[trpc]/route.ts` reports through `console.*` at line 27 although other files in its module log through a logger. Console lines carry no level, fields or correlation and never reach the log pipeline.
  • Console output used as the logging channel src/server/api/trpc.ts:106 — `src/server/api/trpc.ts` reports through `console.*` at line 106 although other files in its module log through a logger. Console lines carry no level, fields or correlation and never reach the log pipeline.
  • Console output used as the logging channel src/server/lib/auth-api.ts:111 — `src/server/lib/auth-api.ts` reports through `console.*` at line 111 although other files in its module log through a logger. Console lines carry no level, fields or correlation and never reach the log pipeline.
  • Console output used as the logging channel src/server/lib/auth-api.ts:114 — `src/server/lib/auth-api.ts` reports through `console.*` at line 114 although other files in its module log through a logger. Console lines carry no level, fields or correlation and never reach the log pipeline.
  • Console output used as the logging channel src/server/lib/auth-api.ts:135 — `src/server/lib/auth-api.ts` reports through `console.*` at line 135 although other files in its module log through a logger. Console lines carry no level, fields or correlation and never reach the log pipeline.
  • Console output used as the logging channel src/server/lib/auth-api.ts:156 — `src/server/lib/auth-api.ts` reports through `console.*` at line 156 although other files in its module log through a logger. Console lines carry no level, fields or correlation and never reach the log pipeline.
  • Console output used as the logging channel src/server/lib/auth-api.ts:196 — `src/server/lib/auth-api.ts` reports through `console.*` at line 196 although other files in its module log through a logger. Console lines carry no level, fields or correlation and never reach the log pipeline.
  • Console output used as the logging channel src/server/lib/auth-api.ts:209 — `src/server/lib/auth-api.ts` reports through `console.*` at line 209 although other files in its module log through a logger. Console lines carry no level, fields or correlation and never reach the log pipeline.
  • Console output used as the logging channel src/server/utils/retry.ts:53 — `src/server/utils/retry.ts` reports through `console.*` at line 53 although other files in its module log through a logger. Console lines carry no level, fields or correlation and never reach the log pipeline.
  • Console output used as the logging channel src/server/utils/retry.ts:63 — `src/server/utils/retry.ts` reports through `console.*` at line 63 although other files in its module log through a logger. Console lines carry no level, fields or correlation and never reach the log pipeline.
  • Console output used as the logging channel src/server/utils/retry.ts:70 — `src/server/utils/retry.ts` reports through `console.*` at line 70 although other files in its module log through a logger. Console lines carry no level, fields or correlation and never reach the log pipeline.
  • Console output used as the logging channel src/server/utils/retry.ts:185 — `src/server/utils/retry.ts` reports through `console.*` at line 185 although other files in its module log through a logger. Console lines carry no level, fields or correlation and never reach the log pipeline.
  • Console output used as the logging channel src/server/utils/retry.ts:188 — `src/server/utils/retry.ts` reports through `console.*` at line 188 although other files in its module log through a logger. Console lines carry no level, fields or correlation and never reach the log pipeline.
X4 · Structured logging · Interpolated log message defeats structured logging · ×3
  • Interpolated log message defeats structured logging src/server/lib/error-handlers/trpc-error-handler.ts:30 — `error` at line 30 is handed a template literal with `${…}` substitutions as its message, so the logger receives one finished string — the values in it cannot be queried, filtered or aggregated as fields, and every occurrence reads as a different message. Pass the values beside a constant message instead: `logger.error({ orderId, status }, 'order status updated')` for pino and bunyan, `logger.error('order status updated', { orderId, status })` for winston. If these calls go through a NestJS `Logger` routed into pino, nestjs-pino forwards an object first argument as fields in the same way.
  • Interpolated log message defeats structured logging src/server/lib/error-handlers/trpc-error-handler.ts:132 — `warn` at line 132 is handed a template literal with `${…}` substitutions as its message, so the logger receives one finished string — the values in it cannot be queried, filtered or aggregated as fields, and every occurrence reads as a different message. Pass the values beside a constant message instead: `logger.warn({ orderId, status }, 'order status updated')` for pino and bunyan, `logger.warn('order status updated', { orderId, status })` for winston. If these calls go through a NestJS `Logger` routed into pino, nestjs-pino forwards an object first argument as fields in the same way.
  • Interpolated log message defeats structured logging src/server/lib/error-handlers/trpc-error-handler.ts:170 — `info` at line 170 is handed a template literal with `${…}` substitutions as its message, so the logger receives one finished string — the values in it cannot be queried, filtered or aggregated as fields, and every occurrence reads as a different message. Pass the values beside a constant message instead: `logger.info({ orderId, status }, 'order status updated')` for pino and bunyan, `logger.info('order status updated', { orderId, status })` for winston. If these calls go through a NestJS `Logger` routed into pino, nestjs-pino forwards an object first argument as fields in the same way.
D12 · Dependency Hygiene · Deprecated · ×2
  • Deprecated: @esbuild-kit/core-utils REDACTED:171 — @esbuild-kit/core-utils 3.3.2 is resolved in REDACTED and is marked deprecated by its publisher: "Merged into tsx: https://tsx.hirok.io". This repository does not declare it — a direct dependency pulls it in, so the move is to upgrade or replace that dependency.
  • Deprecated: @esbuild-kit/esm-loader REDACTED:175 — @esbuild-kit/esm-loader 2.6.5 is resolved in REDACTED and is marked deprecated by its publisher: "Merged into tsx: https://tsx.hirok.io". This repository does not declare it — a direct dependency pulls it in, so the move is to upgrade or replace that dependency.
AX6 · Interface segregation · Fat interface · ×1
  • Fat interface: IRoleRepository (19 required operations) src/server/domain/repositories/role-repository.ts:27 — `IRoleRepository` declares 19 required operations: `create`, `findById`, `findByName`, `findByNames`, `findAll`, `updateBasicInfo`, `updateBasicInfoPartial`, `updateName`, `updateDescription`, `deleteById`, `assignRoleToUser`, `removeRoleFromUser`, `setUserRoles`, `updateUserRolesBulk`, `getUserRoleNames`, `getUsersWithRoles`, `userHasRole`, `userHasAnyRole`, `userHasAllRoles`. Counted over its REQUIRED operations — a method signature or a function-typed property with no `?`, once per signature; optional members and data properties are not counted, because no implementer is forced to write them. A wide interface forces every implementer and caller to depend on methods they don't use (the Interface-Segregation 'I' in SOLID). Split it into focused role-interfaces.
C2 · Access Controls · No named authorization policies · ×1
  • No named authorization policies — Authorization IS enforced here (by route guards, auth middleware or checks that refuse a caller) — this is NOT a claim that endpoints are unprotected. What's missing is a NAMED rule set: who may do what is encoded inline where it is checked, so the rules can't be listed, reviewed or tested apart from the code that applies them. Recommendation, not a defect.
C2 · Access Controls · Thin authorization enforcement · ×1
  • Thin authorization enforcement — Only 2 place(s) refuse an unauthorized caller — too few to demonstrate default-deny across handlers.
D26 · Project Cohesion · Projects may be oversized for their cohesion · ×1
  • Projects may be oversized for their cohesion — 1 of 1 project(s) overshoot their size bounds, lowering Project Cohesion to 0.0/10. The most over is `(repository root)` (7876 LoC, 102 module-visible types across 30 directories). Review these for cohesion — draw the boundary inside the module first (group each responsibility into its own package or directory and keep the cross-boundary members non-public), since splitting a published package moves types between packages and breaks consumers.
D30 · Dependency Vulnerabilities · Low CVE · ×1
  • REDACTED
D8 · Code Coverage · No tests · ×1
  • No tests — template/sample — This repo declares itself a template / kata / sample; tests are deferred to the application built from it, so coverage is not scored here.
D9 · Test Distribution · No tests found · ×1
  • No tests found — No test suite could be collected — no discoverable tests to count. If this repository does test, wiring the suite to a framework a runner can collect (Vitest, Jest, Mocha, or the runtime's built-in runner (`node --test`, `bun test`, `deno test`)) is what makes it countable here; a pipeline step that invokes a runner is not evidence on its own, because a runner over an empty suite passes. Tests written as plain executables or shell/PowerShell harnesses are not collectible this way and are not scored here.
M2 · Architecture documentation · No ADRs · ×1
  • No ADRs — No Architecture Decision Records found — no conventional ADR directory, no numbered `NNNN-title` documents in any markup this check reads, and nothing ADR-shaped by content. Design rationale recorded elsewhere (a design-notes tree, a mailing list, pull-request discussion) is not visible to this check and is not re-findable per decision, so a future maintainer cannot ask why one choice was made and get an answer.
P3 · Security & performance tooling · No SAST · ×1
  • No SAST — No static application security testing detected. For this repository's stack, add CodeQL's javascript-typescript pack, `semgrep --config=p/typescript`, or eslint-plugin-security — 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.
P4 · Deployment & Rollback · No rollback/health safety · ×1
  • No rollback/health safety — Deployment is orchestrated by compose, but no service declares a `healthcheck:` and nothing pins a previous image to fall back to — the runtime can tell that the container is up, not that it is serving, so a bad release is harder to detect and reverse.
R7 · Dead Code · Unused export 'forgetPassword' · ×1
  • Unused export 'forgetPassword' src/lib/auth-client.ts:8 — Nothing imports this binding — it is safe to review for removal.
R7 · Dead Code · Unused export 'resetPassword' · ×1
  • Unused export 'resetPassword' src/lib/auth-client.ts:8 — Nothing imports this binding — it is safe to review for removal.
R7 · Dead Code · Unused export 'RepoTodoUserQuerySchema' · ×1
  • Unused export 'RepoTodoUserQuerySchema' src/server/domain/repositories/schemas/todo-repository-schemas.ts:117 — Nothing imports this binding — it is safe to review for removal.
R7 · Dead Code · Unused export 'RepoTodoStatusQuerySchema' · ×1
  • Unused export 'RepoTodoStatusQuerySchema' src/server/domain/repositories/schemas/todo-repository-schemas.ts:128 — Nothing imports this binding — it is safe to review for removal.
R7 · Dead Code · Unused export 'RepoUserCreateSchema' · ×1
  • Unused export 'RepoUserCreateSchema' src/server/domain/repositories/schemas/user-repository-schemas.ts:58 — Nothing imports this binding — it is safe to review for removal.
R7 · Dead Code · Unused export 'UserRoleQuerySchema' · ×1
  • Unused export 'UserRoleQuerySchema' src/server/domain/repositories/schemas/user-repository-schemas.ts:160 — Nothing imports this binding — it is safe to review for removal.
R7 · Dead Code · Unused export 'UserEmailQuerySchema' · ×1
  • Unused export 'UserEmailQuerySchema' src/server/domain/repositories/schemas/user-repository-schemas.ts:168 — Nothing imports this binding — it is safe to review for removal.
R7 · Dead Code · Unused export 'UserFilterQuerySchema' · ×1
  • Unused export 'UserFilterQuerySchema' src/server/domain/repositories/schemas/user-repository-schemas.ts:176 — Nothing imports this binding — it is safe to review for removal.
R7 · Dead Code · Unused export 'UserCreateRequestSchema' · ×1
  • Unused export 'UserCreateRequestSchema' src/server/domain/repositories/schemas/user-repository-schemas.ts:192 — Nothing imports this binding — it is safe to review for removal.
R7 · Dead Code · Unused export 'UserUpdateRequestSchema' · ×1
  • Unused export 'UserUpdateRequestSchema' src/server/domain/repositories/schemas/user-repository-schemas.ts:205 — Nothing imports this binding — it is safe to review for removal.
R7 · Dead Code · Unused export 'UserProfileUpdateRequestSchema' · ×1
  • Unused export 'UserProfileUpdateRequestSchema' src/server/domain/repositories/schemas/user-repository-schemas.ts:217 — Nothing imports this binding — it is safe to review for removal.
R7 · Dead Code · Unused export 'UserIdValidationSchema' · ×1
  • Unused export 'UserIdValidationSchema' src/server/domain/repositories/schemas/user-repository-schemas.ts:232 — Nothing imports this binding — it is safe to review for removal.
R7 · Dead Code · Unused export 'RoleValidationSchema' · ×1
  • Unused export 'RoleValidationSchema' src/server/domain/repositories/schemas/user-repository-schemas.ts:238 — Nothing imports this binding — it is safe to review for removal.
R7 · Dead Code · Unused export 'EmailValidationSchema' · ×1
  • Unused export 'EmailValidationSchema' src/server/domain/repositories/schemas/user-repository-schemas.ts:244 — Nothing imports this binding — it is safe to review for removal.
R7 · Dead Code · Unused export 'NameValidationSchema' · ×1
  • Unused export 'NameValidationSchema' src/server/domain/repositories/schemas/user-repository-schemas.ts:255 — Nothing imports this binding — it is safe to review for removal.
R7 · Dead Code · Unused export 'BioValidationSchema' · ×1
  • Unused export 'BioValidationSchema' src/server/domain/repositories/schemas/user-repository-schemas.ts:264 — Nothing imports this binding — it is safe to review for removal.
R7 · Dead Code · Unused export 'UrlValidationSchema' · ×1
  • Unused export 'UrlValidationSchema' src/server/domain/repositories/schemas/user-repository-schemas.ts:272 — Nothing imports this binding — it is safe to review for removal.
R7 · Dead Code · Unused export 'createLoggerFromConfig' · ×1
  • Unused export 'createLoggerFromConfig' src/server/infrastructure/logging/logger-factory.ts:48 — Nothing imports this binding — it is safe to review for removal.
R7 · Dead Code · Unused export 'zObjectId' · ×1
  • Unused export 'zObjectId' src/server/lib/validation/zod-utils.ts:19 — Nothing imports this binding — it is safe to review for removal.
R7 · Dead Code · Unused export 'zObjectIdOptional' · ×1
  • Unused export 'zObjectIdOptional' src/server/lib/validation/zod-utils.ts:20 — Nothing imports this binding — it is safe to review for removal.
R7 · Dead Code · Unused export 'zObjectIdArray' · ×1
  • Unused export 'zObjectIdArray' src/server/lib/validation/zod-utils.ts:21 — Nothing imports this binding — it is safe to review for removal.
R7 · Dead Code · Unused export 'InferSchemaOutput' · ×1
  • Unused export 'InferSchemaOutput' src/server/lib/validation/zod-utils.ts:68 — Nothing imports this binding — it is safe to review for removal.
R7 · Dead Code · Unused export 'safeParse' · ×1
  • Unused export 'safeParse' src/server/lib/validation/zod-utils.ts:122 — Nothing imports this binding — it is safe to review for removal.
R7 · Dead Code · Unused export 'CreateUserInput' · ×1
  • Unused export 'CreateUserInput' src/server/schemas/user.ts:28 — Nothing imports this binding — it is safe to review for removal.
R7 · Dead Code · Unused export 'UpdateUserInput' · ×1
  • Unused export 'UpdateUserInput' src/server/schemas/user.ts:29 — Nothing imports this binding — it is safe to review for removal.
R7 · Dead Code · Unused export 'UpdateProfileInput' · ×1
  • Unused export 'UpdateProfileInput' src/server/schemas/user.ts:30 — Nothing imports this binding — it is safe to review for removal.
R7 · Dead Code · Unused export 'RouterInputs' · ×1
  • Unused export 'RouterInputs' src/trpc/react.tsx:32 — Nothing imports this binding — it is safe to review for removal.
R8 · Dependency Hygiene · Type-only dependency '@thaitype/core-utils' in production deps · ×1
  • Type-only dependency '@thaitype/core-utils' in production deps src/server/context/app-context.ts:1 — Every import is type-only — move it to devDependencies.
X5 · Nullable reference types · Null assertions (`!`) reduce the strict null checking score · ×1
  • Null assertions (`!`) reduce the strict null checking score — ~1.7 `!` null assertions per 1k TypeScript source lines — 15 assertion(s) across the 8926 source line(s) of the 75 TypeScript file(s) read, which is the only code the operator asserts anything in (a `!` in a `.js` file is not this operator and was not counted, and one in a file whose null checking is off silences nothing). Densest: src/server/api/routers/todo.ts (14), src/server/utils/retry.ts (1). Each one tells the compiler to trust the author about null, suppressing the very diagnostic `strictNullChecks` exists to produce.
Minor — 24 finding(s)
D12 · Dependency Hygiene · Outdated (npm) · ×24
  • Outdated (npm): @mantine/core — @mantine/core is pinned at 7.17.8; registry.npmjs.org publishes 9.7.3 as the latest release. Upgrading is a judgement call — read that package's changelog for what changed between the two — but a direct production dependency several releases behind is where security and compatibility debt accumulates silently.
  • Outdated (npm): @mantine/form — @mantine/form is pinned at 7.17.8; registry.npmjs.org publishes 9.7.3 as the latest release. Upgrading is a judgement call — read that package's changelog for what changed between the two — but a direct production dependency several releases behind is where security and compatibility debt accumulates silently.
  • Outdated (npm): @mantine/hooks — @mantine/hooks is pinned at 7.17.8; registry.npmjs.org publishes 9.7.3 as the latest release. Upgrading is a judgement call — read that package's changelog for what changed between the two — but a direct production dependency several releases behind is where security and compatibility debt accumulates silently.
  • Outdated (npm): @mantine/modals — @mantine/modals is pinned at 7.17.8; registry.npmjs.org publishes 9.7.3 as the latest release. Upgrading is a judgement call — read that package's changelog for what changed between the two — but a direct production dependency several releases behind is where security and compatibility debt accumulates silently.
  • Outdated (npm): @mantine/notifications — @mantine/notifications is pinned at 7.17.8; registry.npmjs.org publishes 9.7.3 as the latest release. Upgrading is a judgement call — read that package's changelog for what changed between the two — but a direct production dependency several releases behind is where security and compatibility debt accumulates silently.
  • Outdated (npm): @t3-oss/env-nextjs — @t3-oss/env-nextjs is pinned at 0.12.0; registry.npmjs.org publishes 0.13.11 as the latest release. Upgrading is a judgement call — read that package's changelog for what changed between the two — but a direct production dependency several releases behind is where security and compatibility debt accumulates silently.
  • Outdated (npm): @tabler/icons-react — @tabler/icons-react is pinned at 3.34.1; registry.npmjs.org publishes 3.49.0 as the latest release. Upgrading is a judgement call — read that package's changelog for what changed between the two — but a direct production dependency several releases behind is where security and compatibility debt accumulates silently.
  • Outdated (npm): @tanstack/react-query — @tanstack/react-query is pinned at 5.84.1; registry.npmjs.org publishes 5.104.5 as the latest release. Upgrading is a judgement call — read that package's changelog for what changed between the two — but a direct production dependency several releases behind is where security and compatibility debt accumulates silently.
  • Outdated (npm): @trpc/client — @trpc/client is pinned at 11.4.4; registry.npmjs.org publishes 11.19.0 as the latest release. Upgrading is a judgement call — read that package's changelog for what changed between the two — but a direct production dependency several releases behind is where security and compatibility debt accumulates silently.
  • Outdated (npm): @trpc/react-query — @trpc/react-query is pinned at 11.4.4; registry.npmjs.org publishes 11.19.0 as the latest release. Upgrading is a judgement call — read that package's changelog for what changed between the two — but a direct production dependency several releases behind is where security and compatibility debt accumulates silently.
  • Outdated (npm): @trpc/server — @trpc/server is pinned at 11.4.4; registry.npmjs.org publishes 11.19.0 as the latest release. Upgrading is a judgement call — read that package's changelog for what changed between the two — but a direct production dependency several releases behind is where security and compatibility debt accumulates silently.
  • Outdated (npm): better-auth — better-auth is pinned at 1.3.4; registry.npmjs.org publishes 1.7.12 as the latest release. Upgrading is a judgement call — read that package's changelog for what changed between the two — but a direct production dependency several releases behind is where security and compatibility debt accumulates silently.
  • Outdated (npm): dotenv — dotenv is pinned at 16.6.1; registry.npmjs.org publishes 18.0.8 as the latest release. Upgrading is a judgement call — read that package's changelog for what changed between the two — but a direct production dependency several releases behind is where security and compatibility debt accumulates silently.
  • Outdated (npm): drizzle-kit — drizzle-kit is pinned at 0.29.1; registry.npmjs.org publishes 0.31.11 as the latest release. Upgrading is a judgement call — read that package's changelog for what changed between the two — but a direct production dependency several releases behind is where security and compatibility debt accumulates silently.
  • Outdated (npm): drizzle-orm — drizzle-orm is pinned at 0.38.4; registry.npmjs.org publishes 0.45.4 as the latest release. Upgrading is a judgement call — read that package's changelog for what changed between the two — but a direct production dependency several releases behind is where security and compatibility debt accumulates silently.
  • Outdated (npm): jsonwebtoken — jsonwebtoken is pinned at 9.0.2; registry.npmjs.org publishes 9.0.3 as the latest release. Upgrading is a judgement call — read that package's changelog for what changed between the two — but a direct production dependency several releases behind is where security and compatibility debt accumulates silently.
  • Outdated (npm): next — next is pinned at 15.4.5; registry.npmjs.org publishes 16.4.2 as the latest release. Upgrading is a judgement call — read that package's changelog for what changed between the two — but a direct production dependency several releases behind is where security and compatibility debt accumulates silently.
  • Outdated (npm): pino — pino is pinned at 9.7.0; registry.npmjs.org publishes 10.4.0 as the latest release. Upgrading is a judgement call — read that package's changelog for what changed between the two — but a direct production dependency several releases behind is where security and compatibility debt accumulates silently.
  • Outdated (npm): pino-pretty — pino-pretty is pinned at 13.1.1; registry.npmjs.org publishes 13.2.0 as the latest release. Upgrading is a judgement call — read that package's changelog for what changed between the two — but a direct production dependency several releases behind is where security and compatibility debt accumulates silently.
  • Outdated (npm): postgres — postgres is pinned at 3.4.7; registry.npmjs.org publishes 3.4.9 as the latest release. Upgrading is a judgement call — read that package's changelog for what changed between the two — but a direct production dependency several releases behind is where security and compatibility debt accumulates silently.
  • Outdated (npm): react — react is pinned at 19.1.1; registry.npmjs.org publishes 19.3.1 as the latest release. Upgrading is a judgement call — read that package's changelog for what changed between the two — but a direct production dependency several releases behind is where security and compatibility debt accumulates silently.
  • Outdated (npm): react-dom — react-dom is pinned at 19.1.1; registry.npmjs.org publishes 19.3.1 as the latest release. Upgrading is a judgement call — read that package's changelog for what changed between the two — but a direct production dependency several releases behind is where security and compatibility debt accumulates silently.
  • Outdated (npm): superjson — superjson is pinned at 2.2.2; registry.npmjs.org publishes 2.2.6 as the latest release. Upgrading is a judgement call — read that package's changelog for what changed between the two — but a direct production dependency several releases behind is where security and compatibility debt accumulates silently.
  • Outdated (npm): zod — zod is pinned at 3.25.76; registry.npmjs.org publishes 4.6.7 as the latest release. Upgrading is a judgement call — read that package's changelog for what changed between the two — but a direct production dependency several releases behind is where security and compatibility debt accumulates silently.

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.

DimensionToolVersionCommandFindingsRaw output
D28 · Secrets (history)gitleaks—gitleaks detect --no-banner --config /opt/gitleaks-rules/watchdog-gitleaks.toml --report-format json --report-path /tmp/watchdog-gitleaks-a30d79506cc7452ea17314fcf396add3/history.json --exit-code 0 --source .0artifacts/raw/gitleaks-history.json
D28 · Secrets (history)gitleaks—gitleaks detect --no-git --no-banner --config /opt/gitleaks-rules/watchdog-gitleaks.toml --report-format json --report-path /tmp/watchdog-gitleaks-a30d79506cc7452ea17314fcf396add3/tree.json --exit-code 0 --source .0artifacts/raw/gitleaks-tree.json
D29 · Static Analysis (SAST)semgrep—semgrep --config /opt/semgrep-rules/security-audit.yml --config /opt/semgrep-rules/owasp-top-ten.yml --config /opt/semgrep-rules/watchdog-sast.yml --json --quiet --timeout 10 --timeout-threshold 3 --metrics off .7artifacts/raw/semgrep.json
D30 · Dependency Vulnerabilitiestrivy—trivy fs --scanners vuln --format json --quiet --severity CRITICAL,HIGH,MEDIUM,LOW --skip-dirs **/bin/** --skip-dirs **/obj/** . --skip-db-update29artifacts/raw/trivy-fs.json
D31 · IaC & Container Securitytrivy—trivy config --format json --quiet .2artifacts/raw/trivy-config.json
D32 · Data Compliance (PII/GDPR)semgrep—semgrep: not applicable — No personal data was found crossing a boundary the PII/GDPR ruleset checks — nothing written to a log or console sink, placed in a URL or query string, or persisted to browser storage. That is a clean result for the LEAK surface only: this ruleset detects personal data escaping, it does not inventory the personal data a repository holds, so it is not evidence that this repository has no personal-data surface. The personal-data map (Appendix C) and the C1-C5 compliance cards are what speak to that. semgrep could not parse 2 file(s) — `src/server/infrastructure/repositories/drizzle-role-repository.ts`, `src/server/lib/db.ts` — so the PII/GDPR sweep did not cover the unparsed regions of them; rows reported elsewhere in those files are real.0—
D36 · Supply-chain Provenance & Signingprovenance—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.0—
D37 · Vulnerability-disclosure Policydisclosure—disclosure: not applicable — No vulnerability-disclosure policy file found (SECURITY.md/.markdown/.rst/.txt at root or under .github/.forgejo/.gitea/docs, .well-known/security.txt). A coordinated-disclosure policy may live off-repo, so this is not evidenced rather than failed.0—
D40 · Network Egress Confinementruntime-hardening—runtime-hardening: not applicable — No Kubernetes/orchestration workloads found in the repository manifests; network egress policy is a cluster-native control that may live at the platform/firewall layer, so there is nothing to assess here.0—
D41 · Kernel & Syscall Confinementruntime-hardening—runtime-hardening: not applicable — No Kubernetes/orchestration workloads found in the repository manifests; seccomp/AppArmor/SELinux confinement is a workload-level control, so there is nothing to assess here.0—
D42 · Runtime Threat Enforcementruntime-hardening—runtime-hardening: not applicable — No Kubernetes/orchestration workloads found in the repository manifests; runtime threat-detection and admission-control policy are cluster-level controls, so there is nothing to assess here.0—
D43 · Malicious Dependenciestrivy—trivy fs --scanners vuln --format json --quiet --severity CRITICAL,HIGH,MEDIUM,LOW --skip-dirs **/bin/** --skip-dirs **/obj/** . --skip-db-update0artifacts/raw/trivy-fs.json

Run 01a16440-0e66-7718-ab63-21b7afb502c3 · every finding is also locatable in findings.md, and the complete scoring record (with exit codes + durations) in sidecar.json.

Issues: 25 · Warnings: 99 · Recommendations: 58 · Info: 24 — Appendix A · all findings · full markdown report.
Generated by Watchdog — deterministic code-health analysis. 22-10-2026 @ 15:34 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.

⬇ Findings, MITRE CWE-tagged .sarif⬇ Health changelog .md