Leaderboard github.com

ricardojmendez/UnitySteer

Steering, obstacle avoidance and path following behaviors for the Unity Game Engine

View repository ↗
C#
★ 1,255
commit 1a2404d50b91
scored 2026-11-14
scoring prov-5+qual-2+sec-2

AI provenance

none-detected

Confidence: 65%
Coverage: 100%

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

Code quality

49/100

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.

Dispute or request a re-score Full report JSON

AI provenance

0% none-detected

No AI attribution or AI-consistent velocity signals detected.

How the score is built

Explicitly attributed share0%
Unattributed share in AI-pace bursts0%
Estimated AI-generated share0%
AI tool configuration files0
Work sessions at AI pace0
Releases at AI pace0
Coding-style index (1.0+ means possible)0.00

Lines added per month all AI-attributed share

2009-044,389 · 0% AI
2009-052,131 · 0% AI
2009-06748 · 0% AI
2009-072,575 · 0% AI
2009-08126 · 0% AI
2009-111 · 0% AI
2010-0271 · 0% AI
2010-061,738 · 0% AI
2010-071,235 · 0% AI
2010-08278 · 0% AI
2010-0989 · 0% AI
2010-10581 · 0% AI
2010-1153 · 0% AI
2010-12180 · 0% AI
2011-01483 · 0% AI
2011-02362 · 0% AI
2011-03395 · 0% AI
2011-04107 · 0% AI
2011-0580 · 0% AI
2011-07146 · 0% AI
2011-08118 · 0% AI
2011-1044 · 0% AI
2011-1142 · 0% AI
2011-1223 · 0% AI
2012-03591 · 0% AI
2012-04453 · 0% AI
2012-05428 · 0% AI
2012-06695 · 0% AI
2012-124 · 0% AI
2013-030 · 0% AI
2013-0611 · 0% AI
2013-0733 · 0% AI
2013-08532 · 0% AI
2013-0930 · 0% AI
2013-100 · 0% AI
2013-12223 · 0% AI
2014-01168 · 0% AI
2014-02279 · 0% AI
2014-041 · 0% AI
2014-062 · 0% AI
2014-071,601 · 0% AI
2014-08356 · 0% AI
2014-093,731 · 0% AI
2014-105 · 0% AI
2014-111 · 0% AI
2015-034 · 0% AI
2015-10831 · 0% AI
2015-111,274 · 0% AI
2016-01744 · 0% AI
2016-02523 · 0% AI
2016-120 · 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: 546
effective_loc: 28,515
tools_detected: 0

AI tool configurationok

artifacts: 0
tools_configured: 0
workflow_agents: 0

Commit velocityok

excluded_import_loc: 3,722
flagged_loc: 0
flagged_loc_share: 0.0%
flagged_units: 0
max_loc_per_hour: 433.27
measured_loc: 24,793
median_loc_per_hour: 57.60
pr_timed_units: 0
pre_ai_era_burst_loc: 0
pre_ai_era_bursts: 0
pre_ai_era_measured_loc: 24,793
work_units: 326

Release velocityok

flagged_releases: 0
max_loc_per_day: 538
releases: 10

Coding styleok

count:assistant_voice: 0
count:emoji_in_code: 0
count:narrated_steps: 0
count:placeholder: 0
files:assistant_voice: 0
files:emoji_in_code: 0
files:narrated_steps: 0
files:placeholder: 0
index: 0
lines_scanned: 10,906
per_kloc:assistant_voice: 0
per_kloc:emoji_in_code: 0
per_kloc:narrated_steps: 0
per_kloc:placeholder: 0

Code quality

49 poor

Code quality is poor: test-to-source ratio 0.00, no CI test run detected; 6% of function code in complex or long functions; 65% duplicated lines. Weakest area: duplication.

How the score is built

Complexity83
Duplication2
Lint and smells85
Tests and CI15
Documentation85
Type safety40
Review processnot measured

Evidence by analyzer

Complexity (lizard)ok3 items

complex_functions: 3
function_nloc: 3,196
functions: 288
long_functions: 0
many_param_functions: 0
mean_ccn: 2.33
p90_ccn: 5
risky_nloc_share: 6.1%

Duplication (jscpd)ok10 items

compared_lines: 7,269
duplicated_lines: 4,690
duplicated_share: 64.5%
files: 92

Lintok

category:best-practice: 3
category:correctness: 4
findings: 7
scanned_lines: 10,906
weighted_findings: 7

Tests and CIok1 item

CI config: .travis.yml .travis.yml

check:ci_present: yes
check:ci_runs_lint: no
check:ci_runs_tests: no
check:has_tests: no
check:test_ratio: no
check:tests_cochange: no
ci_files: 1
cochange_commits: 256
cochange_share: 0.0%
source_lines: 10,906
test_lines: 0
test_ratio: 0

Documentationok3 items

README.md README.md
License.txt License.txt
CHANGELOG.md CHANGELOG.md

check:changelog: yes
check:contributing: no
check:license: yes
check:readme: yes
readme_lines: 19

Type safetyok

check:low_escape_density: yes
check:strict_config: no
escapes: 0
escapes_per_kloc: 0

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: 10,906
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

7 medium

Severity	Rule	Location	Message	Tool
medium	`opengrep/python.requests.best-practice.use-raise-for-status`	.deploy/travis/deploy_setup.py:43	There's an HTTP request made with requests, but the raise_for_status() utility method isn't used. This can result in request errors going unnoticed and your code behaving in unexpected ways, such as if your authorization API returns a...	Lint
medium	`opengrep/python.requests.best-practice.use-timeout`	.deploy/travis/deploy_setup.py:43	Detected a 'requests' call without a timeout set. By default, 'requests' calls wait until the connection is closed. This means a 'requests' call without a timeout will hang the program if a response is never received. Consider setting a...	Lint
medium	`opengrep/python.lang.correctness.use-sys-exit`	.deploy/travis/deploy_setup.py:52	Detected use of `exit`. Use `sys.exit` over the python shell `exit` built-in. `exit` is a helper for the interactive shell and may not be available on all Python implementations.	Lint
medium	`opengrep/python.requests.best-practice.use-timeout`	.deploy/travis/docs_parser.py:42	Detected a 'requests' call without a timeout set. By default, 'requests' calls wait until the connection is closed. This means a 'requests' call without a timeout will hang the program if a response is never received. Consider setting a...	Lint
medium	`opengrep/python.lang.correctness.use-sys-exit`	.deploy/travis/main_parser.py:80	Detected use of `exit`. Use `sys.exit` over the python shell `exit` built-in. `exit` is a helper for the interactive shell and may not be available on all Python implementations.	Lint
medium	`opengrep/python.lang.correctness.use-sys-exit`	.deploy/travis/main_parser.py:82	Detected use of `exit`. Use `sys.exit` over the python shell `exit` built-in. `exit` is a helper for the interactive shell and may not be available on all Python implementations.	Lint
medium	`opengrep/python.lang.correctness.use-sys-exit`	.deploy/travis/misc_parser.py:18	Detected use of `exit`. Use `sys.exit` over the python shell `exit` built-in. `exit` is a helper for the interactive shell and may not be available on all Python implementations.	Lint

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	ok	`prov-4`	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`	7
Tests and CI	Code quality	ok	`—`	0
Type safety	Code quality	ok	`—`	0
CI workflows (zizmor)	Security	skipped	`—`	0
Dependencies (osv-scanner)	Security	skipped	`—`	0
Release downloads	Security	ok	`—`	0
Security posture	Security	ok	`—`	0
Package registries	Security	skipped	`—`	0	no registry dependencies declared
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	`1a2404d50b91`	`prov-5+qual-2+sec-2`	0%	49	82
2026-11-14	`1a2404d50b91`	`prov-4+qual-2+sec-2`	0%	49	82

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/ricardojmendez/UnitySteer/ai.svg)](https://repotrust.synapticcyber.com/r/github.com/ricardojmendez/UnitySteer/)

[![RepoTrust quality](https://repotrust.synapticcyber.com/badge/github.com/ricardojmendez/UnitySteer/quality.svg)](https://repotrust.synapticcyber.com/r/github.com/ricardojmendez/UnitySteer/)

[![RepoTrust security](https://repotrust.synapticcyber.com/badge/github.com/ricardojmendez/UnitySteer/security.svg)](https://repotrust.synapticcyber.com/r/github.com/ricardojmendez/UnitySteer/)

Full text report

Repository: https://github.com/ricardojmendez/UnitySteer
Commit: 1a2404d50b911e4adab5c43ae92ec3e34de0ef2c
Generated: 2026-11-14T14:52:07+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	none-detected	65%	100%
Code quality	49	poor	90%	100%
Security	82	adequate	85%	100%

AI provenance

No AI attribution or AI-consistent velocity signals detected.

Explicitly attributed share (lower bound): 0.0%
Unattributed share in AI-consistent velocity bursts: 0.0%
Estimated AI-generated share: 0.0%

Month	Lines added	Attributed to AI
2014-04	1	0%
2014-06	2	0%
2014-07	1,601	0%
2014-08	356	0%
2014-09	3,731	0%
2014-10	5	0%
2014-11	1	0%
2015-03	4	0%
2015-10	831	0%
2015-11	1,274	0%
2016-01	744	0%
2016-02	523	0%

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; 6% of function code in complex or long functions; 65% duplicated lines. Weakest area: duplication.

Area	Score
Complexity (lizard)	83
Duplication	2
Code smells (Opengrep)	85
Tests and CI	15
Documentation	85
Type safety	40
Process (Scorecard review/maintenance)	n/a

Functions: 288; mean complexity 2.3, 90th percentile 5; 3 complex and 0 long functions
Duplicated lines: 64.5% of 7,269 compared
Tests: 0 test lines for 10,906 source lines (ratio 0.00); CI test commands: none detected; 0% of recent source commits also change tests
Docs missing or thin: contributing

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: 10,906; test lines: 0

Language	Lines
C#	10,015
Shell	491
Python	400