AI Slop Code Risk Monitor

VoltAgent/awesome-claude-code-subagents

SlopCodeMonitor badge for VoltAgent/awesome-claude-code-subagents Adjusted legacy signal; badge bands: 25 / 50 / 75 (different from dashboard bands).

A collection of 100+ specialized Claude Code subagents covering a wide range of development use cases

1.5 Low pattern signal View on GitHub

Open-Source Code Quality, Security and Technical Debt Review

This report summarizes scanner evidence for VoltAgent/awesome-claude-code-subagents, a Shell project with 26,230 GitHub stars. SynthScan examined 41,826 lines of code across 198 source files, recording 29 pattern matches distributed across 3 syntactic categories. The legacy adjusted pattern signal is 1.5 (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.

1.5
Adjusted Signal
1.5
Raw Pattern Score
100%
Time Factor
2026-10-30
Last Push
26.2K
Stars
Shell
Language
41.8K
Lines of Code
198
Files
29
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 7.2/100 · LOW

Can maintainers explain intent, assumptions, and trade-offs? 29 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 4.8/100 · LOW

Which changes need focused human review? 29 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 6LOW 23

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 29 distinct pattern matches across 3 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 Overuse21 hits · 43 pts
SeverityFileLineSnippetContext
LOW⚡tools/subagent-catalog/search.md27### Step 1: Get catalogCOMMENT
LOW⚡tools/subagent-catalog/search.md35### Step 2: Match and returnCOMMENT
LOW⚡tools/subagent-catalog/search.md44### Step 3: Handle edge casesCOMMENT
LOW⚡tools/subagent-catalog/list.md16### Step 1: Ensure cache is freshCOMMENT
LOW⚡tools/subagent-catalog/list.md23### Step 2: Extract and display categoriesCOMMENT
LOW⚡tools/subagent-catalog/list.md32### Step 3: Format outputCOMMENT
LOWtools/subagent-catalog/fetch.md44### Step 1: Resolve pathCOMMENT
LOWtools/subagent-catalog/fetch.md56### Step 2: Fetch definitionCOMMENT
LOWtools/subagent-catalog/fetch.md69### Step 3: Display and offer optionsCOMMENT
LOWtools/subagent-catalog/invalidate.md16### Step 1: Source configCOMMENT
LOWtools/subagent-catalog/invalidate.md22### Step 2: Invalidate (and optionally refresh)COMMENT
LOWtools/subagent-catalog/invalidate.md37### Step 3: ConfirmCOMMENT
LOW⚡…ries/10-research-analysis/first-principles-thinking.md11### Step 1: Define the Problem PreciselyCOMMENT
LOW⚡…ries/10-research-analysis/first-principles-thinking.md16### Step 2: Identify All Current AssumptionsCOMMENT
LOW⚡…ries/10-research-analysis/first-principles-thinking.md23### Step 3: Challenge Each AssumptionCOMMENT
LOW⚡…ries/10-research-analysis/first-principles-thinking.md30### Step 4: Identify the Fundamental TruthsCOMMENT
LOW⚡…ries/10-research-analysis/first-principles-thinking.md37### Step 5: Rebuild from ScratchCOMMENT
LOW⚡categories/08-business-product/growth-loops.md51### Step 1: Identify Your OutputCOMMENT
LOW⚡categories/08-business-product/growth-loops.md58### Step 2: Map the LoopCOMMENT
LOW⚡categories/08-business-product/growth-loops.md64### Step 3: Find the ConstraintCOMMENT
LOW⚡categories/08-business-product/growth-loops.md70### Step 4: Measure Loop EfficiencyCOMMENT
Modern AI Meta-Vocabulary6 hits · 17 pts
SeverityFileLineSnippetContext
MEDIUMREADME.md308### [09. Meta & Orchestration](categories/09-meta-orchestration/)COMMENT
MEDIUMcategories/09-meta-orchestration/README.md54### [**multi-agent-coordinator**](multi-agent-coordinator.md) - Advanced multi-agent orchestrationCOMMENT
MEDIUMcategories/09-meta-orchestration/README.md54### [**multi-agent-coordinator**](multi-agent-coordinator.md) - Advanced multi-agent orchestrationCOMMENT
MEDIUMcategories/03-infrastructure/README.md59### [**kubernetes-specialist**](kubernetes-specialist.md) - Container orchestration masterCOMMENT
MEDIUMcategories/03-infrastructure/README.md89### [**terragrunt-expert**](terragrunt-expert.md) - Terragrunt orchestration and DRY IaC specialistCOMMENT
MEDIUMcategories/02-language-specialists/csharp-developer.md3description: "Use this agent when building ASP.NET Core web APIs, cloud-native .NET solutions, or modern C# applicationsCODE
Redundant / Tautological Comments2 hits · 3 pts
SeverityFileLineSnippetContext
LOWinstall-agents.sh346 # Check if installed (by filename)COMMENT
LOWinstall-agents.sh441 # Check if currently installedCOMMENT