Leaderboard github.com
4lrick/simple-reminder
Simple Discord bot to create reminders
AI provenance
0%
possible
- Confidence
- 55%
- Coverage
- 100%
Estimated share of AI-generated code. Explicit attribution is a lower bound.
Code quality
54/100
weak
- Confidence
- 90%
- Coverage
- 100%
Complexity, duplication, lint density, tests, CI, docs and review process.
Security
74/100
adequate
- Confidence
- 85%
- Coverage
- 100%
Secrets, static analysis, vulnerable dependencies, CI and supply-chain posture.
AI provenance
0% possible
Weak signals consistent with AI-assisted development. Comments and strings use phrasing typical of LLM-written code (see the coding style evidence).
How the score is built
- Explicitly attributed share0%
- Unattributed share in AI-pace bursts27%
- Estimated AI-generated share0%
- AI tool configuration files0
- Work sessions at AI pace1
- Releases at AI pacenot measured
- Coding-style index (1.0+ means possible)13.34
Lines added per month all AI-attributed share
- 2025-024,678 · 0% AI
- 2025-03309 · 0% AI
- 2025-05285 · 0% AI
Evidence by analyzer
Explicit AI attributionok
- attributed_commit_share
- 0.0%
- attributed_commits
- 0
- attributed_loc
- 0
- attributed_loc_share
- 0.0%
- commits
- 58
- effective_loc
- 5,272
- tools_detected
- 0
AI tool configurationok
- artifacts
- 0
- tools_configured
- 0
- workflow_agents
- 0
Commit velocityok1 item
- excluded_import_loc
- 0
- flagged_loc
- 1,441
- flagged_loc_share
- 27.3%
- flagged_units
- 1
- max_loc_per_hour
- 571.26
- measured_loc
- 5,272
- median_loc_per_hour
- 77.91
- pr_timed_units
- 0
- pre_ai_era_burst_loc
- 0
- pre_ai_era_bursts
- 0
- pre_ai_era_measured_loc
- 0
- work_units
- 16
Release velocityskipped
Coding styleok
- count:assistant_voice
- 0
- count:emoji_in_code
- 44
- count:narrated_steps
- 0
- count:placeholder
- 0
- files:assistant_voice
- 0
- files:emoji_in_code
- 7
- files:narrated_steps
- 0
- files:placeholder
- 0
- index
- 13.34
- lines_scanned
- 1,649
- per_kloc:assistant_voice
- 0
- per_kloc:emoji_in_code
- 26.68
- per_kloc:narrated_steps
- 0
- per_kloc:placeholder
- 0
Code quality
54 weak
Code quality is weak: test-to-source ratio 0.50, CI runs tests; 60% of function code in complex or long functions; 8% duplicated lines. Weakest area: complexity.
How the score is built
- Complexity17
- Duplication60
- Lint and smells54
- Tests and CI87
- Documentation40
- Type safety40
- Review processnot measured
Evidence by analyzer
Complexity (lizard)ok8 items
- edit_command in src/commands/edit_reminder.py: complexity 69, 173 lines
- handle_reminder in src/commands/handle_reminder.py: complexity 50, 139 lines
- list_command in src/commands/list_reminders.py: complexity 34, 72 lines
- load_reminders in src/reminder.py: complexity 26, 78 lines
- check_reminders in simple_reminder.py: complexity 23, 64 lines
- message_autocomplete in src/commands/autocomplete.py: complexity 22, 47 lines
- number_autocomplete in src/commands/autocomplete.py: complexity 21, 45 lines
- remove_command in src/commands/remove_reminder.py: complexity 18, 45 lines
- complex_functions
- 8
- function_nloc
- 1,112
- functions
- 42
- long_functions
- 2
- many_param_functions
- 2
- mean_ccn
- 9.43
- p90_ccn
- 23
- risky_nloc_share
- 59.6%
Duplication (jscpd)ok4 items
- 6+ duplicated lines: simple_reminder.py:168 and simple_reminder.py:179
- 6+ duplicated lines: src/commands/autocomplete.py:125 and src/commands/autocomplete.py:167
- 6+ duplicated lines: src/commands/edit_reminder.py:46 and src/commands/remove_reminder.py:30
- 6+ duplicated lines: src/reminder.py:233 and src/reminder.py:307
- compared_lines
- 1,251
- duplicated_lines
- 106
- duplicated_share
- 8.5%
- files
- 14
Lintok
- category:best-practice
- 4
- findings
- 4
- scanned_lines
- 1,649
- weighted_findings
- 4
Tests and CIok2 items
- CI config: .github/workflows/docker-publish.yml
.github/workflows/docker-publish.yml - CI runs tests (pytest)
- check:ci_present
- yes
- check:ci_runs_lint
- no
- check:ci_runs_tests
- yes
- check:has_tests
- yes
- check:test_ratio
- no
- check:tests_cochange
- no
- ci_files
- 1
- cochange_commits
- 42
- cochange_share
- 19.1%
- source_lines
- 1,649
- test_lines
- 818
- test_ratio
- 0.50
Documentationok1 item
- README.md
README.md
- check:changelog
- no
- check:contributing
- no
- check:license
- no
- check:readme
- yes
- readme_lines
- 64
Type safetyok
- check:low_escape_density
- yes
- check:strict_config
- no
- escapes
- 0
- escapes_per_kloc
- 0
Security
74 adequate
Security posture is adequate: 1 known vulnerabilities in 1 dependencies; 9 high-severity workflow issues. Weakest area: posture.
How the score is built
- Secrets100
- Static analysis (SAST)100
- Vulnerable dependencies95
- CI workflows16
- Security posture0
- OpenSSF Scorecardnot measured
Evidence by analyzer
OpenSSF Scorecardskipped
no published OpenSSF Scorecard result for this repo
Package registriesok
- checked
- 6
- declared
- 6
- lookup_errors
- 0
- missing
- 0
- recent
- 0
Secrets (gitleaks)ok
- secrets_current
- 0
- secrets_history
- 0
- secrets_low_confidence
- 0
- secrets_nonprod
- 0
Static analysis (opengrep)ok
- findings
- 0
- findings_high
- 0
- findings_low
- 0
- findings_medium
- 0
- parse_errors
- 0
- scanned_lines
- 1,649
- weighted_findings
- 0
Dependencies (osv-scanner)ok
- penalty
- 3
- vulnerabilities
- 1
- vulnerable_packages
- 1
- vulns_critical
- 0
- vulns_high
- 0
- vulns_low
- 0
- vulns_medium
- 1
- vulns_unknown
- 0
CI workflows (zizmor)ok
- findings
- 11
- findings_high
- 9
- findings_low
- 0
- findings_medium
- 2
- penalty
- 110.40
- workflows
- 1
Security postureok
- check:dependency_updates
- no
- check:lockfiles
- yes
- check:security_policy
- no
- check:signed_commits
- no
- signed_commit_share
- 0.0%
- unpinned_manifests
- 0
Release downloadsok
- binary_assets
- 0
- signals
- 0
- suspicious
- 0
Findings
9 high7 medium
16 findings
| Severity | Rule | Location | Message | Tool |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| high | zizmor/excessive-permissions |
.github/workflows/docker-publish.yml:14 | overly broad permissions [confidence high] | CI workflows (zizmor) |
| high | zizmor/unpinned-uses |
.github/workflows/docker-publish.yml:23 | unpinned action reference [confidence high] | CI workflows (zizmor) |
| high | zizmor/unpinned-uses |
.github/workflows/docker-publish.yml:26 | unpinned action reference [confidence high] | CI workflows (zizmor) |
| high | zizmor/unpinned-uses |
.github/workflows/docker-publish.yml:46 | unpinned action reference [confidence high] | CI workflows (zizmor) |
| high | zizmor/unpinned-uses |
.github/workflows/docker-publish.yml:47 | unpinned action reference [confidence high] | CI workflows (zizmor) |
| high | zizmor/unpinned-uses |
.github/workflows/docker-publish.yml:48 | unpinned action reference [confidence high] | CI workflows (zizmor) |
| high | zizmor/unpinned-uses |
.github/workflows/docker-publish.yml:51 | unpinned action reference [confidence high] | CI workflows (zizmor) |
| high | zizmor/unpinned-uses |
.github/workflows/docker-publish.yml:57 | unpinned action reference [confidence high] | CI workflows (zizmor) |
| high | zizmor/unpinned-uses |
.github/workflows/docker-publish.yml:60 | unpinned action reference [confidence high] | CI workflows (zizmor) |
| medium | opengrep/python.lang.best-practice.unspecified-open-encoding |
src/reminder.py:112 | Missing 'encoding' parameter. 'open()' uses device locale encodings by default, corrupting files with special characters. Specify the encoding to ensure cross-platform support when opening files in text mode (e.g. encoding="utf-8"). | Lint |
| medium | opengrep/python.lang.best-practice.unspecified-open-encoding |
src/reminder.py:168 | Missing 'encoding' parameter. 'open()' uses device locale encodings by default, corrupting files with special characters. Specify the encoding to ensure cross-platform support when opening files in text mode (e.g. encoding="utf-8"). | Lint |
| medium | opengrep/python.lang.best-practice.unspecified-open-encoding |
src/server_config.py:20 | Missing 'encoding' parameter. 'open()' uses device locale encodings by default, corrupting files with special characters. Specify the encoding to ensure cross-platform support when opening files in text mode (e.g. encoding="utf-8"). | Lint |
| medium | opengrep/python.lang.best-practice.unspecified-open-encoding |
src/server_config.py:32 | Missing 'encoding' parameter. 'open()' uses device locale encodings by default, corrupting files with special characters. Specify the encoding to ensure cross-platform support when opening files in text mode (e.g. encoding="utf-8"). | Lint |
| medium | zizmor/artipacked |
.github/workflows/docker-publish.yml:23 | credential persistence through GitHub Actions artifacts [confidence low] | CI workflows (zizmor) |
| medium | zizmor/artipacked |
.github/workflows/docker-publish.yml:46 | credential persistence through GitHub Actions artifacts [confidence low] | CI workflows (zizmor) |
| medium | osv/GHSA-6w46-j5rx-g56g |
requirements.txt | [email protected] (PyPI) is affected by PYSEC-2026-1845, GHSA-6w46-j5rx-g56g | Dependencies (osv-scanner) |
Tools and coverage
Every analyzer that ran on this commit. A failed or skipped tool is a coverage gap: its share of the score is left out and the coverage figure drops.
| Analyzer | Pillar | Status | Version | Findings | Note |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AI tool configuration | AI provenance | ok | signatures-v1 | 0 | |
| Explicit AI attribution | AI provenance | ok | signatures-v1 | 0 | |
| Release velocity | AI provenance | skipped | — | 0 | |
| Coding style | AI provenance | ok | — | 0 | |
| Commit velocity | AI provenance | ok | prov-4 | 0 | |
| Complexity (lizard) | Code quality | ok | lizard 1.25.1 | 0 | |
| Documentation | Code quality | ok | — | 0 | |
| Duplication (jscpd) | Code quality | ok | repotrust-dup-w6 | 0 | |
| Lint | Code quality | ok | opengrep 1.33.1; rules f1d2b562b414 | 4 | |
| Tests and CI | Code quality | ok | — | 0 | |
| Type safety | Code quality | ok | — | 0 | |
| CI workflows (zizmor) | Security | ok | zizmor 1.32.0 | 11 | |
| Dependencies (osv-scanner) | Security | ok | osv-scanner version: 2.7.1 | 1 | |
| Release downloads | Security | ok | — | 0 | |
| Security posture | Security | ok | — | 0 | |
| Package registries | Security | ok | — | 0 | |
| Static analysis (opengrep) | Security | ok | opengrep 1.33.1; rules f1d2b562b414 | 0 | |
| OpenSSF Scorecard | Security | skipped | — | 0 | no published OpenSSF Scorecard result for this repo |
| Secrets (gitleaks) | Security | ok | gitleaks 8.30.1 | 0 |
Score history
Scores from different scoring versions aren't directly comparable.
| Scored | Commit | Scoring | AI provenance | Quality | Security |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-11-14 | 1d984c08e558 | prov-5+qual-2+sec-2 | 0% | 54 | 74 |
| 2026-11-14 | 1d984c08e558 | prov-4+qual-2+sec-2 | 0% | 54 | 74 |
Full text report
- Repository: https://github.com/4lrick/simple-reminder
- Commit:
1d984c08e558d9e67a0e710e1e86f46e7b8c09f0 - Generated: 2026-11-14T14:51:59+00:00
- Scorer 0.1.0, scoring prov-5+qual-2+sec-2, report schema v2
Scores
| Pillar | Score | Signal | Confidence | Coverage |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| AI provenance (estimated AI-generated share) | 0 | possible | 55% | 100% |
| Code quality | 54 | weak | 90% | 100% |
| Security | 74 | adequate | 85% | 100% |
AI provenance
Weak signals consistent with AI-assisted development. Comments and strings use phrasing typical of LLM-written code (see the coding style evidence).
-
Explicitly attributed share (lower bound): 0.0%
-
Unattributed share in AI-consistent velocity bursts: 27.3%
-
Estimated AI-generated share: 0.0%
-
Stylometry index: 13.34 per 1,000 lines (narrated steps 0, placeholders 0, assistant phrasing 0, emoji 44). Reported as a signal, not scored.
| Month | Lines added | Attributed to AI |
|---|---|---|
| 2025-02 | 4,678 | 0% |
| 2025-03 | 309 | 0% |
| 2025-05 | 285 | 0% |
Evidence
- 1,441 lines of first-party code in ~2.5h (571 lines/hour, 2 commit session) (ffc3e33357a3)
AI provenance describes how code was produced; it is not a quality judgment. Unless attribution is explicit, these are signals consistent with AI generation, not proof. Squash/rebase workflows, imported code, and rewritten history reduce accuracy.
Code quality
Code quality is weak: test-to-source ratio 0.50, CI runs tests; 60% of function code in complex or long functions; 8% duplicated lines. Weakest area: complexity.
| Area | Score |
|---|---|
| Complexity (lizard) | 17 |
| Duplication | 60 |
| Code smells (Opengrep) | 54 |
| Tests and CI | 87 |
| Documentation | 40 |
| Type safety | 40 |
| Process (Scorecard review/maintenance) | n/a |
- Functions: 42; mean complexity 9.4, 90th percentile 23; 8 complex and 2 long functions
- Duplicated lines: 8.5% of 1,251 compared
- Tests: 818 test lines for 1,649 source lines (ratio 0.50); CI test commands: pytest; 19% of recent source commits also change tests
- Docs missing or thin: license, contributing, changelog
Most complex functions:
- edit_command in src/commands/edit_reminder.py: complexity 69, 173 lines
- handle_reminder in src/commands/handle_reminder.py: complexity 50, 139 lines
- list_command in src/commands/list_reminders.py: complexity 34, 72 lines
- load_reminders in src/reminder.py: complexity 26, 78 lines
- check_reminders in simple_reminder.py: complexity 23, 64 lines
Security
Security posture is adequate: 1 known vulnerabilities in 1 dependencies; 9 high-severity workflow issues. Weakest area: posture.
| Area | Score |
|---|---|
| Secrets (gitleaks, tree + history) | 100 |
| Static analysis (Opengrep) | 100 |
| Vulnerable dependencies (OSV) | 95 |
| CI workflows (zizmor) | 16 |
| Posture (policy, updates, signing, lockfiles) | 0 |
| OpenSSF Scorecard | n/a |
-
Known vulnerabilities: 1 in 1 packages (critical 0, high 0, medium 1, low 0)
-
Posture checks passed: lockfiles; missing: security policy, dependency updates, signed commits
Top findings
| Severity | Finding | Location |
|---|---|---|
| high | zizmor/excessive-permissions: overly broad permissions [confidence high] |
.github/workflows/docker-publish.yml:14 |
| high | zizmor/unpinned-uses: unpinned action reference [confidence high] |
.github/workflows/docker-publish.yml:23 |
| high | zizmor/unpinned-uses: unpinned action reference [confidence high] |
.github/workflows/docker-publish.yml:26 |
| high | zizmor/unpinned-uses: unpinned action reference [confidence high] |
.github/workflows/docker-publish.yml:46 |
| high | zizmor/unpinned-uses: unpinned action reference [confidence high] |
.github/workflows/docker-publish.yml:47 |
| high | zizmor/unpinned-uses: unpinned action reference [confidence high] |
.github/workflows/docker-publish.yml:48 |
| high | zizmor/unpinned-uses: unpinned action reference [confidence high] |
.github/workflows/docker-publish.yml:51 |
| high | zizmor/unpinned-uses: unpinned action reference [confidence high] |
.github/workflows/docker-publish.yml:57 |
| high | zizmor/unpinned-uses: unpinned action reference [confidence high] |
.github/workflows/docker-publish.yml:60 |
| medium | osv/GHSA-6w46-j5rx-g56g: [email protected] (PyPI) is affected by PYSEC-2026-1845, GHSA-6w46-j5rx-g56g |
requirements.txt |
| medium | zizmor/artipacked: credential persistence through GitHub Actions artifacts [confidence low] |
.github/workflows/docker-publish.yml:23 |
| medium | zizmor/artipacked: credential persistence through GitHub Actions artifacts [confidence low] |
.github/workflows/docker-publish.yml:46 |
Static signals only: the scorer never runs the project's code. Secret findings are pattern matches that were not verified, and secret values are never stored.
Repository profile
- Source lines: 1,649; test lines: 818
| Language | Lines |
|---|---|
| Python | 2,467 |