AI Slop Code Risk Monitor

UfoMiao/zcf

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

Zero-Config Code Flow for Claude code & Codex

3.2 Low pattern signal View on GitHub

Open-Source Code Quality, Security and Technical Debt Review

This report summarizes scanner evidence for UfoMiao/zcf, a TypeScript project with 6,079 GitHub stars. SynthScan examined 55,908 lines of code across 366 source files, recording 90 pattern matches distributed across 4 syntactic categories. The legacy adjusted pattern signal is 3.2 (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.

3.2
Adjusted Signal
3.2
Raw Pattern Score
100%
Time Factor
2026-10-29
Last Push
6.1K
Stars
TypeScript
Language
55.9K
Lines of Code
366
Files
90
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 14.4/100 · LOW

Can maintainers explain intent, assumptions, and trade-offs? 88 finding(s).

Hallucinated Dependency & Supply Chain Risk 0.5/100 · LOW

Are imports declared and package/API names verified? 2 finding(s).

Agent Over-Engineering Ratio 0.7/100 · LOW

Are wrappers, guards, and repeated structures necessary? 8 finding(s).

PR Review Velocity Impact 8.2/100 · LOW

Which changes need focused human review? 90 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 1MEDIUM 0LOW 89

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 90 distinct pattern matches across 4 syntactic categories. 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.

Structural Annotation Overuse80 hits · 166 pts
SeverityFileLineSnippetContext
LOW⚡…history/2026-01-09_001414_fix-toml-top-level-fields.md24### Step 1: Refactor `updateTopLevelTomlFields()` functionCOMMENT
LOW⚡…history/2026-01-09_001414_fix-toml-top-level-fields.md34### Step 2: Add helper functionsCOMMENT
LOW⚡…history/2026-01-09_001414_fix-toml-top-level-fields.md38### Step 3: Write/update test casesCOMMENT
LOW⚡…history/2026-01-09_001414_fix-toml-top-level-fields.md48### Step 4: Run tests to verifyCOMMENT
LOW⚡.zcf/plan/history/ccometixline-statusline-config.md81### Step 1: Type Definitions (2 min)COMMENT
LOW⚡.zcf/plan/history/ccometixline-statusline-config.md85### Step 2: Write Test Cases (5 min)COMMENT
LOW⚡.zcf/plan/history/ccometixline-statusline-config.md89### Step 3: Update Configuration Template (3 min)COMMENT
LOW⚡.zcf/plan/history/ccometixline-statusline-config.md93### Step 4: Implement Configuration Logic (5 min)COMMENT
LOW⚡.zcf/plan/history/ccometixline-statusline-config.md97### Step 5: Integration Testing (3 min)COMMENT
LOW⚡.zcf/plan/history/ccometixline-statusline-config.md100### Step 6: Documentation Updates (2 min)COMMENT
LOW⚡.zcf/plan/history/ccr-skip-option.md16### Step 1: Add i18n translationsCOMMENT
LOW⚡.zcf/plan/history/ccr-skip-option.md20### Step 2: Modify preset selection logicCOMMENT
LOW⚡.zcf/plan/history/ccr-skip-option.md25### Step 3: Handle skip logicCOMMENT
LOW⚡.zcf/plan/history/ccr-skip-option.md30### Step 4: Implement CCR restart and status checkCOMMENT
LOW⚡.zcf/plan/history/ccr-skip-option.md35### Step 5: Add configuration completion tipsCOMMENT
LOW⚡.zcf/plan/history/ccr-skip-option.md39### Step 6: Update testsCOMMENT
LOW.zcf/plan/history/2026-01-12_091556_更新codex模型配置选项.md18### Step 1: 更新 src/utils/features.tsCOMMENT
LOW.zcf/plan/history/2026-01-12_091556_更新codex模型配置选项.md32### Step 2: 更新 src/utils/code-tools/codex.tsCOMMENT
LOW.zcf/plan/history/2026-01-12_091556_更新codex模型配置选项.md45### Step 3: 更新 src/utils/code-tools/codex-config-switch.tsCOMMENT
LOW.zcf/plan/history/2026-01-12_091556_更新codex模型配置选项.md58### Step 4: 更新 src/commands/init.tsCOMMENT
LOW.zcf/plan/history/2026-01-12_091556_更新codex模型配置选项.md69### Step 5: 更新中文翻译文件COMMENT
LOW.zcf/plan/history/2026-01-12_091556_更新codex模型配置选项.md91### Step 6: 更新英文翻译文件COMMENT
LOW.zcf/plan/history/2026-01-12_091556_更新codex模型配置选项.md113### Step 7: 运行测试验证COMMENT
LOW.zcf/plan/history/refactor-output-styles-to-common.md13### Step 1: Create Common Output Styles Directory StructureCOMMENT
LOW.zcf/plan/history/refactor-output-styles-to-common.md31### Step 2: Update Claude Code Output Style ReferenceCOMMENT
LOW.zcf/plan/history/refactor-output-styles-to-common.md43### Step 3: Update Codex System Prompt ReferenceCOMMENT
LOW⚡.zcf/plan/history/refactor-output-styles-to-common.md56### Step 4: Delete Duplicate Template FilesCOMMENT
LOW⚡.zcf/plan/history/refactor-output-styles-to-common.md63### Step 5: Update DocumentationCOMMENT
LOW⚡.zcf/plan/history/refactor-output-styles-to-common.md70### Step 6: Run TestsCOMMENT
LOW⚡…/history/2026-01-28_004229_remove-codex-chat-format.md11### Step 1: Modify api-providers.tsCOMMENT
LOW⚡…/history/2026-01-28_004229_remove-codex-chat-format.md15### Step 2: Modify codex-provider-manager.tsCOMMENT
LOW⚡…/history/2026-01-28_004229_remove-codex-chat-format.md19### Step 3: Modify codex.tsCOMMENT
LOW⚡…/history/2026-01-28_004229_remove-codex-chat-format.md23### Step 4: Modify codex-config-switch.tsCOMMENT
LOW⚡…/history/2026-01-28_004229_remove-codex-chat-format.md27### Step 5: Modify init.tsCOMMENT
LOW⚡…/history/2026-01-28_004229_remove-codex-chat-format.md30### Step 6: Update i18n filesCOMMENT
LOW⚡…/history/2026-01-28_004229_remove-codex-chat-format.md34### Step 7: Run testsCOMMENT
LOW…cf/plan/history/codex-mcp-extra-fields-preservation.md39### Step 1: Enhance Type DefinitionCOMMENT
LOW⚡…cf/plan/history/codex-mcp-extra-fields-preservation.md54### Step 2: Modify parseCodexConfig FunctionCOMMENT
LOW⚡…cf/plan/history/codex-mcp-extra-fields-preservation.md61### Step 3: Create TOML Field FormatterCOMMENT
LOW⚡…cf/plan/history/codex-mcp-extra-fields-preservation.md68### Step 4: Modify renderCodexConfig FunctionCOMMENT
LOW⚡…cf/plan/history/codex-mcp-extra-fields-preservation.md75### Step 5: Write Unit TestsCOMMENT
LOW⚡…cf/plan/history/codex-mcp-extra-fields-preservation.md84### Step 6: Write Edge Case TestsCOMMENT
LOW⚡…cf/plan/history/codex-mcp-extra-fields-preservation.md93### Step 7: Update DocumentationCOMMENT
LOW⚡.zcf/plan/history/env-permission-config.md11### Step 1: 创建简化的配置导入功能COMMENT
LOW⚡.zcf/plan/history/env-permission-config.md18### Step 2: 更新国际化文本COMMENT
LOW⚡.zcf/plan/history/env-permission-config.md24### Step 3: 更新功能模块COMMENT
LOW⚡.zcf/plan/history/env-permission-config.md29### Step 4: 集成到菜单系统COMMENT
LOW…26-01-12_085710_fix-issue-259-mcp-config-corruption.md39### Step 1: Create codex-toml-updater.tsCOMMENT
LOW…26-01-12_085710_fix-issue-259-mcp-config-corruption.md48### Step 2: Modify API Call Sites (8 locations)COMMENT
LOW…26-01-12_085710_fix-issue-259-mcp-config-corruption.md62### Step 3: Modify MCP Call Sites (3 locations)COMMENT
LOW…26-01-12_085710_fix-issue-259-mcp-config-corruption.md70### Step 4: VerificationCOMMENT
LOW⚡.zcf/plan/history/refactor-git-workflow-templates.md52### Step 1: Create shared directory structureCOMMENT
LOW⚡.zcf/plan/history/refactor-git-workflow-templates.md56### Step 2: Move English git workflow filesCOMMENT
LOW⚡.zcf/plan/history/refactor-git-workflow-templates.md61### Step 3: Move Chinese git workflow filesCOMMENT
LOW⚡.zcf/plan/history/refactor-git-workflow-templates.md66### Step 4: Delete duplicate filesCOMMENT
LOW⚡.zcf/plan/history/refactor-git-workflow-templates.md72### Step 5: Update workflow-installer.tsCOMMENT
LOW⚡.zcf/plan/history/refactor-git-workflow-templates.md77### Step 6: Update documentationCOMMENT
LOW.zcf/plan/history/refactor-sixStep-to-common.md21### Step 1: Create common/workflow/sixStep template files ✅COMMENT
LOW.zcf/plan/history/refactor-sixStep-to-common.md36### Step 2: Modify workflow-installer.ts (Claude Code) ✅COMMENT
LOW.zcf/plan/history/refactor-sixStep-to-common.md47### Step 3: Modify codex.ts (Codex) ✅COMMENT
20 more matches not shown…
Hyper-Verbose Identifiers8 hits · 8 pts
SeverityFileLineSnippetContext
LOW.zcf/plan/history/codex-fixes-summary.md20export async function runCodexSystemPromptSelection(): Promise<void>CODE
LOW.zcf/plan/history/codex-fixes-summary.md23export async function runCodexWorkflowSelection(): Promise<void>CODE
LOW.zcf/plan/history/Claude-Code-Multi-Config-TDD-Plan.md219function validateSkipPromptOptions(options: InitOptions): void {CODE
LOW.zcf/plan/history/Claude-Code-Multi-Config-TDD-Plan.md281async function convertToClaudeCodeProfile(config: ApiConfigDefinition): Promise<ClaudeCodeProfile> {CODE
LOW.zcf/plan/history/Claude-Code-Multi-Config-TDD-Plan.md490export async function handleInteractiveClaudeCodeSwitch(): Promise<void> {CODE
LOW.zcf/plan/history/Claude-Code-Multi-Config-TDD-Plan.md564async function handleClaudeCodeConfigSwitch(selectedConfig: string): Promise<void> {CODE
LOW.zcf/plan/history/Claude-Code-Multi-Config-TDD-Plan.md753export async function handleInteractiveClaudeCodeSwitch(): Promise<void> {CODE
LOW.zcf/plan/history/codex-windows-mcp-fix.md49function applyCodexPlatformCommand(config: CodexMcpService): void {CODE
Magic Placeholder Names1 hit · 5 pts
SeverityFileLineSnippetContext
HIGH.zcf/plan/history/exa-mcp-config-update.md13 "EXA_API_KEY": "your-api-key-here"CODE
Fake / Example Data1 hit · 1 pts
SeverityFileLineSnippetContext
LOWpackages/core/test/skills-presets.test.ts172 await writeFile(join(dir, 'en', 'placeholder'), '')CODE