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.

Tiago84Barros/Radar-de-Passagens-Inteligentes

https://github.com/Tiago84Barros/Radar-de-Passagens-Inteligentes · scanned 2026-06-16 00:36 UTC (2 months, 2 weeks ago)

26 raw signals (2 security + 24 graph)

File as issue Image

UNIFIED Repobility · multi-layer engine · AI coders

Complete repo analysis

Last scanned 2 months, 2 weeks ago · v1 · 24 actionable findings from 2 signal sources. 2 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 · 22 findings

Severity distribution — click a segment to filter

Active filters: excluding tests × Reset all

Severity: Critical 0 High 1 Medium 3 Low 13 9-Layer: Software Security Quality Integrity Frontend Hardware Data Network Cicd Source: Security checks 2 System graph 22 Crowd 0 Layer: Quality 14 Software 7 Frontend 1 Security 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 3 places
low Near-duplicate function bodies in 2 places repo-level

View all duplicates & near-duplicates findings →

Commented-out code 4 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/`.

4 matching findings on this repo

info Commented-code block (5 lines) in providers/provider_manager.py:183
info Commented-code block (5 lines) in providers/gemini_search_provider.py:24
info Commented-code block (7 lines) in services/air_network.py:171
info Commented-code block (6 lines) in services/monitoring_bot.py:35

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/e7b95667-ccab-4fdf-aab6-9b9a472147e9/

To check status programmatically (no auth required):

curl -s https://repobility.com/api/v1/public/scan/e7b95667-ccab-4fdf-aab6-9b9a472147e9/

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.