RepoTrust

Leaderboard github.com

amather/MetaTypes

  • View repository ↗
  • C#
  • ★ 0
  • commit c799682727b3
  • scored 2026-11-14
  • scoring prov-5+qual-2+sec-2

unreviewed-ai-risk

AI provenance

59%

explicit

Confidence
82%
Coverage
100%

Estimated share of AI-generated code. Explicit attribution is a lower bound.

Code quality

47/100

poor

Confidence
90%
Coverage
100%

Complexity, duplication, lint density, tests, CI, docs and review process.

Security

82/100

adequate

Confidence
85%
Coverage
100%

Secrets, static analysis, vulnerable dependencies, CI and supply-chain posture.

AI provenance

59% explicit

Explicit AI attribution on 59% of first-party code added; an estimated 59% including velocity signals.

How the score is built

  • Explicitly attributed share59%
  • Unattributed share in AI-pace bursts0%
  • Estimated AI-generated share59%
  • AI tool configuration files4
  • Work sessions at AI pace0
  • Releases at AI pacenot measured
  • Coding-style index (1.0+ means possible)1.48

Attributed AI tools

ToolCommitsLines addedFirst seenLast seen
Claude Code285,6732025-07-292025-08-16

Lines added per month all AI-attributed share

  1. 2025-072,001 · 92% AI
  2. 2025-085,538 · 69% AI
  3. 2025-09578 · 0% AI
  4. 2025-101,515 · 0% AI
  5. 2026-0624 · 0% AI

Findings in AI-attributed lines vs the rest

From git blame: 1,685 lines trace to AI-attributed commits, 2,704 to others. Reported, not scored.

Findings per 1,000 linesAI-attributedOtherRatio
Code quality0.000.00—
Security0.000.00—

Evidence by analyzer

Explicit AI attributionok26 items
attributed_commit_share
58.3%
attributed_commits
28
attributed_loc
5,673
attributed_loc_share
58.8%
commits
48
effective_loc
9,656
tools_detected
1
AI tool configurationok4 items
artifacts
4
earliest_adoption
2025-08-08
tools_configured
1
workflow_agents
0
Commit velocityok
excluded_import_loc
0
flagged_loc
0
flagged_loc_share
0.0%
flagged_units
0
max_loc_per_hour
461.25
measured_loc
9,656
median_loc_per_hour
77.08
pr_timed_units
0
pre_ai_era_burst_loc
0
pre_ai_era_bursts
0
pre_ai_era_measured_loc
0
work_units
29
Release velocityskipped
Coding styleok
count:assistant_voice
0
count:emoji_in_code
13
count:narrated_steps
0
count:placeholder
0
files:assistant_voice
0
files:emoji_in_code
2
files:narrated_steps
0
files:placeholder
0
index
1.48
lines_scanned
4,389
per_kloc:assistant_voice
0
per_kloc:emoji_in_code
2.96
per_kloc:narrated_steps
0
per_kloc:placeholder
0
Findings in AI-written linesok
ai_lines
1,685
blame_failures
0
files_blamed
71
other_lines
2,704
quality:ai_findings
0
quality:ai_per_kloc
0
quality:other_findings
0
quality:other_per_kloc
0
security:ai_findings
0
security:ai_per_kloc
0
security:other_findings
0
security:other_per_kloc
0

Code quality

47 poor

Code quality is poor: test-to-source ratio 0.00, no CI test run detected; 27% of function code in complex or long functions; 4% duplicated lines. Weakest area: testing.

How the score is built

  • Complexity44
  • Duplication79
  • Lint and smells100
  • Tests and CI0
  • Documentation40
  • Type safetynot measured
  • Review processnot measured

Evidence by analyzer

Complexity (lizard)ok5 items
complex_functions
2
function_nloc
2,106
functions
97
long_functions
4
many_param_functions
0
mean_ccn
3.26
p90_ccn
6
risky_nloc_share
27.1%
Duplication (jscpd)ok5 items
compared_lines
2,678
duplicated_lines
104
duplicated_share
3.9%
files
71
Lintok
findings
0
scanned_lines
4,389
weighted_findings
0
Tests and CIok
check:ci_present
no
check:ci_runs_lint
no
check:ci_runs_tests
no
check:has_tests
no
check:test_ratio
no
check:tests_cochange
no
ci_files
0
cochange_commits
37
cochange_share
0.0%
source_lines
4,389
test_lines
0
test_ratio
0
Documentationok1 item
  • README.md README.md
check:changelog
no
check:contributing
no
check:license
no
check:readme
yes
readme_lines
211
Type safetyskipped

Security

82 adequate

Security posture is adequate: no high-impact findings. Weakest area: posture.

How the score is built

  • Secrets100
  • Static analysis (SAST)100
  • Vulnerable dependenciesnot measured
  • CI workflowsnot measured
  • Security posture0
  • OpenSSF Scorecardnot measured

Evidence by analyzer

OpenSSF Scorecardskipped

no published OpenSSF Scorecard result for this repo

Package registriesskipped

no registry dependencies declared

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
4,389
weighted_findings
0
Dependencies (osv-scanner)skipped
CI workflows (zizmor)skipped
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

No line-level findings.

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.

AnalyzerPillarStatusVersionFindingsNote
AI tool configurationAI provenanceoksignatures-v10
Explicit AI attributionAI provenanceoksignatures-v10
Release velocityAI provenanceskipped—0
Coding styleAI provenanceok—0
Commit velocityAI provenanceokprov-40
Findings in AI-written linesAI provenanceokgit-blame0
Complexity (lizard)Code qualityoklizard 1.25.10
DocumentationCode qualityok—0
Duplication (jscpd)Code qualityokrepotrust-dup-w60
LintCode qualityokopengrep 1.33.1; rules f1d2b562b4140
Tests and CICode qualityok—0
Type safetyCode qualityskipped—0
CI workflows (zizmor)Securityskipped—0
Dependencies (osv-scanner)Securityskipped—0
Release downloadsSecurityok—0
Security postureSecurityok—0
Package registriesSecurityskipped—0no registry dependencies declared
Static analysis (opengrep)Securityokopengrep 1.33.1; rules f1d2b562b4140
OpenSSF ScorecardSecurityskipped—0no published OpenSSF Scorecard result for this repo
Secrets (gitleaks)Securityokgitleaks 8.30.10

Score history

Scores from different scoring versions aren't directly comparable.

ScoredCommitScoringAI provenanceQualitySecurity
2026-11-14c799682727b3prov-5+qual-2+sec-259%4782
2026-11-14c799682727b3prov-4+qual-2+sec-259%4782

Embed a badge

Maintainers can show these in a README. Badges update when the repository is re-scored.

[![RepoTrust ai](https://repotrust.synapticcyber.com/badge/github.com/amather/MetaTypes/ai.svg)](https://repotrust.synapticcyber.com/r/github.com/amather/MetaTypes/)
[![RepoTrust quality](https://repotrust.synapticcyber.com/badge/github.com/amather/MetaTypes/quality.svg)](https://repotrust.synapticcyber.com/r/github.com/amather/MetaTypes/)
[![RepoTrust security](https://repotrust.synapticcyber.com/badge/github.com/amather/MetaTypes/security.svg)](https://repotrust.synapticcyber.com/r/github.com/amather/MetaTypes/)
Full text report
  • Repository: https://github.com/amather/MetaTypes
  • Commit: c799682727b3b7c8d2a98d43881e90cda22c15a4
  • Generated: 2026-11-14T14:52:02+00:00
  • Scorer 0.1.0, scoring prov-5+qual-2+sec-2, report schema v2

Scores

Unreviewed AI code risk: a large share of this code is explicitly AI-attributed, and its tests or review process are weak while quality or security scores are low.

Pillar Score Signal Confidence Coverage
AI provenance (estimated AI-generated share) 59 explicit 82% 100%
Code quality 47 poor 90% 100%
Security 82 adequate 85% 100%

AI provenance

Explicit AI attribution on 59% of first-party code added; an estimated 59% including velocity signals.

  • Explicitly attributed share (lower bound): 58.8%
  • Unattributed share in AI-consistent velocity bursts: 0.0%
  • Estimated AI-generated share: 58.8%
AI tool Attributed commits Lines added
Claude Code 28 5,673
  • AI tooling configured in repo: claude-code

Current source lines last changed by AI-attributed commits: 1,685 of 4,389.

Findings per 1,000 lines AI-attributed Other Ratio
Quality 0.0 0.0 n/a
Security 0.0 0.0 n/a
  • Stylometry index: 1.48 per 1,000 lines (narrated steps 0, placeholders 0, assistant phrasing 0, emoji 13). Reported as a signal, not scored.
Month Lines added Attributed to AI
2025-07 2,001 92%
2025-08 5,538 69%
2025-09 578 0%
2025-10 1,515 0%
2026-06 24 0%

Evidence

  • Claude Code: trailer 'Co-Authored-By: Claude' (30a80eec986f)
  • Claude Code: trailer 'Co-Authored-By: Claude' (31eab9a26926)
  • Claude Code: trailer 'Co-Authored-By: Claude' (a11a2c303670)
  • Claude Code: trailer 'Co-Authored-By: Claude' (7ab6fd4b02ec)
  • Claude Code: trailer 'Co-Authored-By: Claude' (3fdbda19243e)
  • Claude Code: trailer 'Co-Authored-By: Claude' (3574c0fcfabc)
  • Claude Code: trailer 'Co-Authored-By: Claude' (06440f5b716f)
  • Claude Code: trailer 'Co-Authored-By: Claude' (45d9c873335b)
  • Claude Code: trailer 'Co-Authored-By: Claude' (4bf4316c58b8)
  • Claude Code: trailer 'Co-Authored-By: Claude' (9f58d31a987d)
  • Claude Code: trailer 'Co-Authored-By: Claude' (3d2f725dd912)
  • Claude Code: trailer 'Co-Authored-By: Claude' (0aed5a59b03e)
  • Claude Code: trailer 'Co-Authored-By: Claude' (1db908da4e7b)
  • Claude Code: trailer 'Co-Authored-By: Claude' (36088bfba969)
  • Claude Code: trailer 'Co-Authored-By: Claude' (35cf7c8d6d36)

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 poor: test-to-source ratio 0.00, no CI test run detected; 27% of function code in complex or long functions; 4% duplicated lines. Weakest area: testing.

Area Score
Complexity (lizard) 44
Duplication 79
Code smells (Opengrep) 100
Tests and CI 0
Documentation 40
Type safety n/a
Process (Scorecard review/maintenance) n/a
  • Functions: 97; mean complexity 3.3, 90th percentile 6; 2 complex and 4 long functions
  • Duplicated lines: 3.9% of 2,678 compared
  • Tests: 0 test lines for 4,389 source lines (ratio 0.00); CI test commands: none detected; 0% of recent source commits also change tests
  • Docs missing or thin: license, contributing, changelog

Most complex functions:

Security

Security posture is adequate: no high-impact findings. Weakest area: posture.

Area Score
Secrets (gitleaks, tree + history) 100
Static analysis (Opengrep) 100
Vulnerable dependencies (OSV) n/a
CI workflows (zizmor) n/a
Posture (policy, updates, signing, lockfiles) 0
OpenSSF Scorecard n/a
  • Posture checks passed: lockfiles; missing: security policy, dependency updates, signed commits

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: 4,389; test lines: 0
Language Lines
C# 4,389