AI Slop Code Risk Monitor

APIJSON/APIJSON

Name: APIJSON/APIJSON — open-source Code Quality & Security Review | AI Slop Code Risk Monitor
Creator: AI Slop Code Risk Monitor

Adjusted legacy signal; badge bands: 25 / 50 / 75 (different from dashboard bands).

1.2 Low pattern signal View on GitHub

Open-Source Code Quality, Security and Technical Debt Review

This report summarizes scanner evidence for APIJSON/APIJSON. SynthScan examined 30,839 lines of code across 91 source files, recording 37 pattern matches distributed across 1 syntactic category. The legacy adjusted pattern signal is 1.2 (Low pattern signal); it is not an authorship estimate.

Use the findings to ask whether maintainers can explain intent, verify dependencies, simplify unnecessary scaffolding, and focus review effort. Risk Payload v1 adds ownership, supply-chain, over-engineering, and review-effort vectors when available. These are prompts for human verification, not probabilities, security findings, or measured maintenance costs.

1.2

Adjusted Signal

1.2

Raw Pattern Score

100%

Time Factor

—

Last Push

—

Stars

—

Language

30.8K

Lines of Code

Files

Pattern Hits

2026-10-31

Scan Date

0.00

HC Hit Rate

Risk Review · Payload v1

Use each vector to guide manual verification of the underlying findings.

Payload schema: 1.0.0 · Engine: 2.0.0 · Scoring: heuristic-density-v1 · Scan date: 2026-10-31.

Cognitive Ownership Risk 5.8/100 · LOW

Can maintainers explain intent, assumptions, and trade-offs? 37 finding(s).

Hallucinated Dependency & Supply Chain Risk 0.0/100 · LOW

Are imports declared and package/API names verified? 0 finding(s).

Agent Over-Engineering Ratio 0.0/100 · LOW

Are wrappers, guards, and repeated structures necessary? 0 finding(s).

PR Review Velocity Impact 5.8/100 · LOW

Which changes need focused human review? 37 finding(s).

What These Metrics Mean

Adjusted Signal: Legacy pattern score normalized per 1,000 scanned lines and multiplied by the repository-level time factor. It is not an estimate of AI authorship.
Raw Pattern Score: Sum of severity- and context-weighted pattern findings before applying the time factor.
Time Factor: A coarse multiplier based on repository last-push metadata. It does not identify when individual code was written.
Pattern Hits: Count of configured pattern findings. Review each location and surrounding code before acting.
HC Hit Rate: High- and critical-severity findings per scanned file. Severity is a configured detector weight, not proof of a vulnerability or authorship.
Lines / Files: Scan coverage denominators used by the legacy normalized score.

Pattern-Signal History

This chart tracks the legacy adjusted pattern score across scan runs. Changes can reflect source changes, scan coverage, or detector/scoring versions; they do not measure AI adoption or prove that a team refactored code. Compare runs only when their scoring versions are compatible. The dashed line tracks the raw pattern-hit count.

Severity Breakdown

Groups findings by configured severity weight. Severity is not a confidence estimate, security rating, or proof that a package is missing. Verify imports against the project's manifests and inspect each finding in its local design context.

CRITICAL 0HIGH 0MEDIUM 0LOW 37

Directory Score Breakdown

This horizontal bar chart shows where configured pattern scores accumulate across directories. Treat the bars as locations to inspect, not as evidence of authorship or code quality. Use the file-level findings to decide whether a directory needs a focused ownership, dependency, complexity, or review check.

Pattern Findings

The scanner identified 37 distinct pattern matches across 1 syntactic category. Each entry below represents a discrete location in the source code where the engine recorded a detector match to inspect in context. Expand any category row to inspect the individual file paths, line numbers, code snippets, and the lexical context (CODE, COMMENT, or STRING) in which each match was detected.

Reading the findings table: The Severity column indicates the configured finding weight (CRITICAL / HIGH / MEDIUM / LOW). The Context column identifies whether the match occurred inside executable code, an inline comment, or a string literal — legacy comment-context matches receive a ×1.5 score weight. The ⚡ bolt icon marks clustered matches: three or more patterns within a 10-line window, each receiving an additional ×1.5 density multiplier under the legacy scoring model.

Over-Commented Block37 hits · 37 pts

Severity	File	Line	Snippet	Context
LOW	Navigation.md	1	# APIJSON 导航目录	COMMENT
LOW	Navigation.md	21	### [常见问题](/README.md#%E5%B8%B8%E8%A7%81%E9%97%AE%E9%A2%98)	COMMENT
LOW	src/main/java/apijson/JSONMap.java	21	// 只能是 static public Map<String, Object> map = new LinkedHashMap<>();	COMMENT
LOW	src/main/java/apijson/JSONMap.java	41	// Map<String, Object> map = JSON.parseObject(json);	COMMENT
LOW	src/main/java/apijson/JSONMap.java	61	// * @see {@link #putsAll(Map<? extends String, ? extends Object>)}	COMMENT
LOW	src/main/java/apijson/JSONMap.java	781		COMMENT
LOW	src/main/java/apijson/JSONMap.java	801	//	COMMENT
LOW	src/main/java/apijson/JSONMap.java	821	//}	COMMENT
LOW	src/main/java/apijson/JSON.java	21	static {	COMMENT
LOW	src/main/java/apijson/JSON.java	41	// throw new UnsupportedOperationException();	COMMENT
LOW	src/main/java/apijson/JSON.java	61	// throw new UnsupportedOperationException();	COMMENT
LOW	src/main/java/apijson/JSON.java	181	return null;	COMMENT
LOW	src/main/java/apijson/JSON.java	201	// Object value = entry.getValue();	COMMENT
LOW	src/main/java/apijson/JSON.java	301	return (M) obj;	COMMENT
LOW	src/main/java/apijson/JSONList.java	21	// super();	COMMENT
LOW	src/main/java/apijson/JSONList.java	41	///**	COMMENT
LOW	src/main/java/apijson/JSONList.java	201	// if (c == null \|\| c.isEmpty()) {	COMMENT
LOW	src/main/java/apijson/JSONList.java	221	// int sz = size();	COMMENT
LOW	src/main/java/apijson/JSONList.java	241	// }	COMMENT
LOW	src/main/java/apijson/JSONList.java	261	// }	COMMENT
LOW	src/main/java/apijson/JSONList.java	281	// }	COMMENT
LOW	src/main/java/apijson/JSONList.java	301	// int sz = size();	COMMENT
LOW	src/main/java/apijson/JSONRequest.java	21	* <br> request.toArray(...);//not a must	COMMENT
LOW	src/main/java/apijson/JSONRequest.java	41	// this();	COMMENT
LOW	src/main/java/apijson/orm/Operation.java	141	// * 自定义代码，结构是 "code"，例如	COMMENT
LOW	src/main/java/apijson/orm/AbstractVerifier.java	1261	// List<String> condKeys = new ArrayList<>(Arrays.asList(apijson.JSONMap.KEY_ID, apijson.JSONMap.KEY_ID_IN	COMMENT
LOW	src/main/java/apijson/orm/AbstractSQLConfig.java	1621	//if (StringUtil.isEmpty(cfg.getAlias(), true)) {	COMMENT
LOW	src/main/java/apijson/orm/AbstractSQLConfig.java	4121		COMMENT
LOW	src/main/java/apijson/orm/AbstractSQLConfig.java	4801	if (StringUtil.equals(this.getTable(), subquery.gainFrom()) == false && cfg.hasJoin() == false) {	COMMENT
LOW	src/main/java/apijson/orm/AbstractSQLConfig.java	5321	// //order: id+ -> id >= idOfStartIndex; id- -> id <= idOfStartIndex <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<	COMMENT
LOW	src/main/java/apijson/orm/JSONRequest.java	41	}	COMMENT
LOW	src/main/java/apijson/orm/ConfigMethodAccess.java	1	/*Copyright (C) 2026 the APIJSON group. All rights reserved.	COMMENT
LOW	src/main/java/apijson/orm/ConfigMethodAccess.java	21	// * @author Lemon	COMMENT
LOW	src/main/java/apijson/orm/AbstractSQLExecutor.java	801	if (targetValueList.isEmpty() && config.isExplain() == false) {	COMMENT
LOW	src/main/java/apijson/orm/AbstractSQLExecutor.java	841	// 加 row_number 字段并不会导致 count 等聚合函数统计出错，结果偏大，SQL JOIN 才会，之前没发现是因为缓存失效 bug	COMMENT
LOW	src/main/java/apijson/orm/AbstractObjectParser.java	501	+ " \|\| apijson.JSONMap.TABLE_KEY_LIST.contains(key)) >> return null;");	COMMENT
LOW	src/main/java/apijson/orm/AbstractObjectParser.java	521	// //非查询关键词 @key 不影响查询，直接跳过	COMMENT