Public scan — anyone with this URL can view this analysis. Sign up to track your own repos privately, run scheduled re-scans, and get AI fix prompts via your dashboard.
Sign up free Scan another repo

TI0J0A0/Watchout

https://github.com/TI0J0A0/Watchout · scanned 2026-06-16 00:36 UTC (2 months, 2 weeks ago)

25 raw signals (0 security + 25 graph)

File as issue Image
UNIFIED Repobility · multi-layer engine · AI coders

Complete repo analysis

Last scanned 2 months, 2 weeks ago · v1 · 25 actionable findings from 1 signal source. Security checks, system graph analysis, and verified AI-agent feedback are merged into one review queue.

JSON
Combined
85.5
/100
Security checks
86
0 findings
System graph
86
88.9% cov · 25 findings
Critical
0
click to filter
Agents
10
0 votes
Crowd
0
reported
Severity distribution — click a segment to filter
Active filters: excluding tests × Reset all
Severity: Critical 0 High 0 Medium 9 Low 11 9-Layer: Software Security Quality Integrity Frontend Hardware Data Network Cicd Source: Security checks 0 System graph 25 Crowd 0 Layer: Api 1 Frontend 4 Cicd 1 Quality 19
Corpus Intelligence Cross-corpus context (cohort percentile, top patterns, fix plan) is shown only on repositories you own. Sign up and connect your repo to view it.
Scan summary Repository scanned at 85.5/100 with 88.9% coverage. It contains 775 nodes across 17 cross-layer flows, written primarily in mixed languages. Engine surfaced 25 findings — concentrated in quality (19), frontend (4), api (1). Risk profile is low: 0 critical, 0 high, 9 medium. Recommended next step: open the quality layer findings first — that's where the highest-impact wins live.

Showing 20 of 25 actionable findings. Click TP / FP to vote on a finding's accuracy — votes adjust the confidence weighting and improve detection across the platform.

medium System graph quality Agent instructions conf 1.00 Agent authority lacks a verifier contract: .claude/launch.json
This agent instruction grants code or shell authority but does not state the verification gate that decides promotion. The recurring safe pattern is: LLM proposes; deterministic tests/build/security checks verify; only verified code promotes.
.claude/launch.json VerificationClaude instruction
medium System graph quality Agent instructions conf 1.00 Agent authority lacks a verifier contract: .claude/skills/supabase-postgres-best-practices/references/conn-prepared-statements.md
This agent instruction grants code or shell authority but does not state the verification gate that decides promotion. The recurring safe pattern is: LLM proposes; deterministic tests/build/security checks verify; only verified code promotes.
.claude/skills/supabase-postgres-best-practices/references/conn-prepared-statements.md VerificationClaude instruction
medium System graph quality Agent instructions conf 1.00 Agent authority lacks a verifier contract: .claude/skills/supabase-postgres-best-practices/references/data-n-plus-one.md
This agent instruction grants code or shell authority but does not state the verification gate that decides promotion. The recurring safe pattern is: LLM proposes; deterministic tests/build/security checks verify; only verified code promotes.
.claude/skills/supabase-postgres-best-practices/references/data-n-plus-one.md VerificationClaude instruction
medium System graph quality Agent instructions conf 1.00 Agent authority lacks a verifier contract: .claude/skills/supabase/references/skill-feedback.md
This agent instruction grants code or shell authority but does not state the verification gate that decides promotion. The recurring safe pattern is: LLM proposes; deterministic tests/build/security checks verify; only verified code promotes.
.claude/skills/supabase/references/skill-feedback.md VerificationClaude instruction
medium System graph quality Agent instructions conf 1.00 Agent instructions exist but release-hardening basics are missing
AI-coder instruction files were found, but the repo is missing license, ci. Treat this as a contract gap: the agent is guided, but the generated output is not yet guarded by the controls that make it repeatable.
Repo hardeningGenerated repo pattern
medium System graph quality Placeholder conf 1.00 Critical user flow still appears backed by mock or placeholder data
A payment/auth/admin/order/billing-style flow contains mock, fake, TODO, dummy, or placeholder markers in runtime source. In the Fable corpus this is a high-leverage completeness smell: the app can look finished while the money, identity, or tenant flow is still scaffolded.
Mock dataCritical flowGenerated repo pattern
medium System graph cicd CI/CD security conf 1.00 No CI/CD pipelines detected
No GitHub Actions, GitLab CI, or CircleCI configs found. Without CI you can't gate deploys on tests/lints.
CI/CD securityCoverage
medium System graph quality Placeholder conf 1.00 Placeholder or mock-heavy implementation detected
Found 25 placeholder/mock markers across 9 source files. This often means the repo looks complete while core flows still use generated scaffolding or fake data.
Mock dataIncompleteGenerated repo pattern
medium System graph quality Placeholder conf 1.00 Runtime service client appears to use placeholder configuration
A runtime source file appears to wire Supabase/Firebase/AI/payment-style clients to placeholder URLs, keys, or fallback values. In the Fable corpus this often means the UI/API shape is present while the backend service is not actually configured.
Runtime configService clientGenerated repo pattern
low System graph quality Production readiness conf 1.00 Composite production-readiness gap
Multiple low-cost hardening controls are missing together: license, ci. Opus verification showed these co-occurring gaps are a better readiness signal than reading each flag in isolation.
Repo hardeningGenerated repo pattern
low System graph frontend Frontend quality conf 1.00 Icon-only button without accessible name — src/components/MALImport.jsx:104
A `<button>` whose only child is a single glyph or symbol needs `title=` or `aria-label=` so screen readers (and tooltips on hover) work. Why: P3 in CHECKLIST.md — icon-only buttons skipped a title. Rule id: fq.button.no-label
Fq button no label
low System graph frontend Frontend quality conf 1.00 Icon-only button without accessible name — src/pages/AuthPage.jsx:177
A `<button>` whose only child is a single glyph or symbol needs `title=` or `aria-label=` so screen readers (and tooltips on hover) work. Why: P3 in CHECKLIST.md — icon-only buttons skipped a title. Rule id: fq.button.no-label
Fq button no label
low System graph frontend Frontend quality conf 1.00 Icon-only button without accessible name — src/pages/CommunityPage.jsx:287
A `<button>` whose only child is a single glyph or symbol needs `title=` or `aria-label=` so screen readers (and tooltips on hover) work. Why: P3 in CHECKLIST.md — icon-only buttons skipped a title. Rule id: fq.button.no-label
Fq button no label
low System graph frontend Frontend quality conf 1.00 Icon-only button without accessible name — src/pages/ProfilePage.jsx:1139
A `<button>` whose only child is a single glyph or symbol needs `title=` or `aria-label=` so screen readers (and tooltips on hover) work. Why: P3 in CHECKLIST.md — icon-only buttons skipped a title. Rule id: fq.button.no-label
Fq button no label
low System graph quality Tests conf 1.00 Low test-to-source ratio
16 tests / 108 src (ratio 0.15).
low System graph quality License conf 1.00 No license file detected
No LICENSE/COPYING/NOTICE file was found. Generated repositories often omit licensing, which blocks reuse and automated intake.
Repo hardeningGenerated repo pattern
low System graph quality Integrity conf 1.00 Old/deprecated-named symbol `watchout_v2` in src/App.jsx:104
Names with suffixes like `_old`, `_v1`, `_deprecated` usually indicate replaced-but-not-removed code (typical AI-coder leftover). Confirm and delete, or rename if it's the active version.
old markerDead code
low System graph quality Integrity conf 1.00 Old/deprecated-named symbol `watchout_v2` in src/utils/index.js:1
Names with suffixes like `_old`, `_v1`, `_deprecated` usually indicate replaced-but-not-removed code (typical AI-coder leftover). Confirm and delete, or rename if it's the active version.
old markerDead code
low System graph quality Provenance conf 1.00 Shallow git history limits provenance confidence
The repository is a shallow clone. Origin/evolution analysis cannot distinguish fresh generation, imported legacy code, or long-lived human code with high confidence.
Git historyGenerated repo pattern
low System graph quality Complexity conf 1.00 Very large file: src/pages/ProfilePage.jsx (1205 lines)
Files with >800 lines often hide complexity hotspots and discourage tests.
For AI agents: Voting guide (TP/FP) MCP manifest Stdio wrapper SARIF Integrate Findings queue Vote TP/FP on findings to calibrate the engine.
For AI agents + API integrations
Email me when this repo regresses
Free. We re-scan periodically; new criticals → your inbox. No signup required for the scan itself.
API access

This page is publicly accessible at: https://repobility.com/scan/2ace866d-354d-4655-b019-186fa73c6b58/

To check status programmatically (no auth required): 

curl -s https://repobility.com/api/v1/public/scan/2ace866d-354d-4655-b019-186fa73c6b58/

Important — please don't re-submit the same URL repeatedly. The submission endpoint is idempotent: re-submitting the same git URL returns this same scan_token, not a new one. To re-scan this repo, sign up free and use the dashboard.