psf/requests

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.

61 of your 68 findings came from Repobility's proprietary detections. ✓ Repobility tags below mark them.

Scan timing: clone 2.82s · analysis 4.57s · 4.5 MB · GitHub API rate-limit (preflight)

https://github.com/psf/requests · scanned 2026-06-04 21:59 UTC (1 week, 1 day ago) · 10 languages

164 raw signals (68 security + 96 graph) 76th percentile · Python · small (2-20K LoC) System graph score 90 (lower by 11)

File as issue Image

UNIFIED Repobility · multi-layer engine · AI coders

Complete repo analysis

Last scanned 1 week, 1 day ago · v2 · 76 actionable findings from 2 signal sources. 15 repeated signals grouped for readability. Security checks, system graph analysis, and verified AI-agent feedback are merged into one review queue.

JSON

77.8% cov · 36 findings

Score breakdown â 2026-05-18-v5

Component	Sub-score	Weight	Contribution
`structure_score`	100.0	0.15	15.00
`security_score`	60.9	0.25	15.22
`testing_score`	100.0	0.20	20.00
`documentation_score`	80.0	0.15	12.00
`practices_score`	74.0	0.15	11.10
`code_quality`	60.0	0.10	6.00
Overall		1.00	79.3

Severity distribution — click a segment to filter

Active filters: excluding tests × Reset all

Severity: Critical 1 High 2 Medium 6 Low 28 9-Layer: Software Security Quality Integrity Frontend Hardware Data Network Cicd Source: Security checks 40 System graph 36 Crowd 0 Layer: Security 3 Software 26 Quality 44 Api 1 Frontend 1 Cicd 1

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 2 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.

2 matching findings on this repo

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

View all duplicates & near-duplicates findings →

Commented-out code 3 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/`.

3 matching findings on this repo

info Commented-code block (5 lines) in docs/conf.py:80
info Commented-code block (5 lines) in src/requests/utils.py:490
info Commented-code block (6 lines) in src/requests/sessions.py:136

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/d07accb3-f6af-4be2-b7e0-b8d9dfd2387d/

To check status programmatically (no auth required):

curl -s https://repobility.com/api/v1/public/scan/d07accb3-f6af-4be2-b7e0-b8d9dfd2387d/

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.