leon-ai/leon

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.

87 of your 162 findings came from Repobility's proprietary detections. ✓ Repobility tags below mark them.

Scan timing: clone 10.78s · analysis 7.72s · 29.6 MB · GitHub API rate-limit (preflight)

https://github.com/leon-ai/leon · scanned 2026-06-05 18:35 UTC (4 days, 18 hours ago) · 10 languages

495 raw signals (155 security + 340 graph) 11/13 scanners ran 48th percentile · Typescript · large (100-500K LoC) System graph score 80 (lower by 5)

File as issue Image

UNIFIED Repobility · multi-layer engine · AI coders

Complete repo analysis

Last scanned 4 days, 18 hours ago · v2 · 201 actionable findings from 2 signal sources. 124 repeated signals grouped for readability. Security checks, system graph analysis, and verified AI-agent feedback are merged into one review queue.

JSON

100.0% cov · 149 findings

Score breakdown â 2026-05-18-v5

Component	Sub-score	Weight	Contribution
`structure_score`	85.0	0.15	12.75
`security_score`	100.0	0.25	25.00
`testing_score`	35.0	0.20	7.00
`documentation_score`	75.0	0.15	11.25
`practices_score`	77.0	0.15	11.55
`code_quality`	70.0	0.10	7.00
Overall		1.00	74.5

security_score may be inflated — optional security scanners were skipped on this fast scan

Severity distribution — click a segment to filter

Active filters: excluding tests × Reset all

Severity: Critical 1 High 20 Medium 14 Low 125 9-Layer: Software Security Quality Integrity Frontend Hardware Data Network Cicd Source: Security checks 52 System graph 149 Crowd 0 Layer: Quality 74 Security 10 Software 78 Cicd 2 Frontend 28 Api 9

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 5 findings

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.

5 matching findings on this repo

low Near-duplicate function bodies in 4 places
low Near-duplicate function bodies in 3 places repo-level
low Near-duplicate function bodies in 2 places repo-level
low Near-duplicate function bodies in 16 places
low Near-duplicate function bodies in 14 places

View all duplicates & near-duplicates findings →

Legacy markers 2 findings

What it is: TODO, FIXME, XXX, HACK comments. Often indicate a known-broken path the author meant to fix.

Why it matters: Each marker is an unfinished thought. Production code shouldn't ship with debt that's documented but not tracked.

How AI causes it: AI mirrors the style of the codebase, so existing TODOs propagate into new code.

Fix approach: Convert each into a ticket. Delete the comment when the ticket lands. Use a pre-commit hook to block new TODOs without an issue link.

2 matching findings on this repo

low Old/deprecated-named symbol `buildLeonContextLegacy` in tools/coding_developmen…
low Old/deprecated-named symbol `_build_leon_context_legacy` in tools/coding_develo…

View all legacy markers findings →

Commented-out code 2 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/`.

2 matching findings on this repo

info Commented-code block (6 lines) in tcp_server/src/lib/tts/text/english.py:293
info Commented-code block (5 lines) in server/src/core/llm-manager/persona.ts:521

View all commented-out code findings →

Config drift 3 findings

What it is: Settings duplicated across env files, Docker compose, K8s, and code defaults, all with slightly different values.

Why it matters: Production behaviour depends on whichever copy your loader reads first. Subtle bugs in staging that don't reproduce in dev.

How AI causes it: AI writes new config from memory rather than reading the existing source.

Fix approach: Pick one source of truth (env vars + a settings module). Have every other place import from there. Lint for duplicates in CI.

3 matching findings on this repo

low File has no detected symbols: vitest.config.ts
low File has no detected symbols: aurora/preview/vite.config.js
low File has no detected symbols: web-app/vite.config.ts

View all config drift 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/672a583a-861d-47a6-880c-08e510bfe10f/

To check status programmatically (no auth required):

curl -s https://repobility.com/api/v1/public/scan/672a583a-861d-47a6-880c-08e510bfe10f/

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.