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.

WarrenLim1122/arbitrage-trading

https://github.com/WarrenLim1122/arbitrage-trading · scanned 2026-06-16 00:54 UTC (2 months, 1 week ago)

32 raw signals (0 security + 32 graph)

File as issue Image

UNIFIED Repobility · multi-layer engine · AI coders

Complete repo analysis

Last scanned 2 months, 1 week ago · v1 · 31 actionable findings from 1 signal source. 1 repeated signal grouped for readability. Security checks, system graph analysis, and verified AI-agent feedback are merged into one review queue.

JSON

88.9% cov · 31 findings

Severity distribution — click a segment to filter

Active filters: excluding tests × Reset all

Severity: Critical 0 High 2 Medium 4 Low 16 9-Layer: Software Security Quality Integrity Frontend Hardware Data Network Cicd Source: Security checks 0 System graph 31 Crowd 0 Layer: Software 5 Frontend 1 Security 3 Cicd 1 Quality 19 Api 2

Exclude dismissed / FP Exclude test files

Bug-class explainers. Each card groups findings of the same shape — these are the patterns most likely to ship to prod and reappear in future scans unless you systematically fix the cause, not just the instance.

Duplicates & near-duplicates 1 finding

What it is: Same function copy-pasted into multiple modules with minor variations.

Why it matters: Each copy drifts independently — bug fixes apply to one, miss the others.

How AI causes it: AI completes the same pattern in each file rather than refactoring to a shared helper.

Fix approach: Extract the duplicated logic into the most general module both call sites already import. Add tests at the helper level.

1 matching finding on this repo

low Near-duplicate function bodies in 2 places repo-level

View all duplicates & near-duplicates findings →

Commented-out code 7 findings

What it is: Lines of source that were intentionally disabled but never deleted.

Why it matters: Git already remembers history — commented code rots, becomes wrong, and adds noise to diffs.

How AI causes it: AI sometimes comments out broken code instead of fixing it. Reviewers approve out of inertia.

Fix approach: Delete. Trust `git log`. If you really need to remember, save it in a notes file under `docs/`.

7 matching findings on this repo

info Commented-code block (12 lines) in tests/layer2/test_phase2_strategy.py:5
info Commented-code block (5 lines) in tests/layer2/test_phase1_strategy.py:78
info Commented-code block (5 lines) in layer3/_worker_core.py:143
info Commented-code block (5 lines) in layer3/journal/journaling_worker.py:126
info Commented-code block (10 lines) in layer2/logic_core.py:124
info Commented-code block (8 lines) in layer2/telegram_handlers.py:50
info Commented-code block (5 lines) in layer2/state.py:48

View all commented-out code findings →

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/39027c59-491d-4097-a5f6-9a6ee8e8dbbb/

To check status programmatically (no auth required):

curl -s https://repobility.com/api/v1/public/scan/39027c59-491d-4097-a5f6-9a6ee8e8dbbb/

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.