AI Slop Code Risk Monitor

hashicorp/raft

Name: hashicorp/raft — Go 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).

Golang implementation of the Raft consensus protocol

2.4 Low pattern signal View on GitHub

Open-Source Code Quality, Security and Technical Debt Review

This report summarizes scanner evidence for hashicorp/raft, a Go project with 9,158 GitHub stars. SynthScan examined 22,219 lines of code across 80 source files, recording 52 pattern matches distributed across 3 syntactic categories. The legacy adjusted pattern signal is 2.4 (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.

2.4

Adjusted Signal

2.4

Raw Pattern Score

100%

Time Factor

2026-10-18

Last Push

9.2K

Stars

Language

22.2K

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 11.2/100 · LOW

Can maintainers explain intent, assumptions, and trade-offs? 52 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 11.0/100 · LOW

Which changes need focused human review? 52 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 52

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 52 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.

Over-Commented Block50 hits · 50 pts

Severity	File	Line	Snippet	Context
LOW	log.go	21	LogNoop	COMMENT
LOW	log.go	81	// Extensions holds an opaque byte slice of information for middleware. It	COMMENT
LOW	log.go	101	// catch up after restoring a large snapshot. We should never rely on this	COMMENT
LOW	log.go	121		COMMENT
LOW	log.go	201	// without risking inconsistency between the commit index and the log entries.	COMMENT
LOW	transport.go	61	// disk IO. If a Transport does not support this, it can simply	COMMENT
LOW	config.go	21	//	COMMENT
LOW	config.go	41	// needs to leave the cluster and re-enter:	COMMENT
LOW	config.go	61	// the migration path to newer versions of the protocol. Under this version	COMMENT
LOW	config.go	81	// their RemovePeerDeprecated Raft log entries. We need this protocol version	COMMENT
LOW	config.go	101	const (	COMMENT
LOW	config.go	121	//	COMMENT
LOW	config.go	141	// version the wire protocol as well as Raft-specific log entries that	COMMENT
LOW	config.go	161	CommitTimeout time.Duration	COMMENT
LOW	config.go	181		COMMENT
LOW	config.go	201	// LeaderLeaseTimeout is used to control how long the "lease" lasts	COMMENT
LOW	config.go	221	// LogLevel represents a log level. If the value does not match a known	COMMENT
LOW	config.go	241	NoLegacyTelemetry bool	COMMENT
LOW	config.go	281	// TrailingLogs controls how many logs we leave after a snapshot. This is used	COMMENT
LOW	raft_test.go	3041	}	COMMENT
LOW	raft_test.go	3061	// - prev is within the snapshot, before the snapshot's index: assume match.	COMMENT
LOW	configuration.go	121		COMMENT
LOW	configuration.go	141	// snapshot when your state machine hasn't yet applied the committedIndex, we	COMMENT
LOW	replication.go	21	var (	COMMENT
LOW	replication.go	41		COMMENT
LOW	api.go	21	//	COMMENT
LOW	api.go	101	// we need to read-modify-write the atomic. It is NOT necessary to hold this	COMMENT
LOW	api.go	221	// preVoteDisabled control if the pre-vote feature is activated,	COMMENT
LOW	api.go	301	//	COMMENT
LOW	api.go	801	return rc	COMMENT
LOW	api.go	841	// LeaderWithID is used to return the current leader address and ID of the cluster.	COMMENT
LOW	api.go	1081	select {	COMMENT
LOW	api.go	1181	}	COMMENT
LOW	api.go	1281	// as described in the Raft paper.	COMMENT
LOW	api.go	1301	// effect as if the election timeout on the target server fires. Since	COMMENT
LOW	snapshot.go	41		COMMENT
LOW	net_transport.go	41		COMMENT
LOW	net_transport.go	61		COMMENT
LOW	net_transport.go	121		COMMENT
LOW	net_transport.go	141	// performance testing has shown that in practice the pipelining optimization	COMMENT
LOW	saturation_test.go	61	var reported float32	COMMENT
LOW	saturation_test.go	101	var reported float32	COMMENT
LOW	commands.go	1	// Copyright IBM Corp. 2013, 2025	COMMENT
LOW	fsm.go	21	//	COMMENT
LOW	fsm.go	41	// FSMSnapshot.Persist will never be called. Raft will always call	COMMENT
LOW	fsm.go	61	//	COMMENT
LOW	testing.go	201	// will be added as the name of the logger.	COMMENT
LOW	raft.go	641	r.observe(PeerObservation{Peer: repl.peer, Removed: true})	COMMENT
LOW	raft.go	701		COMMENT
LOW	fuzzy/resolve.go	1	// Copyright IBM Corp. 2013, 2025	COMMENT

Verbosity Indicators1 hit · 2 pts

Severity	File	Line	Snippet	Context
LOW	raft.go	1025	// Step 3: send TimeoutNow message to target server.	COMMENT

Structural Annotation Overuse1 hit · 2 pts

Severity	File	Line	Snippet	Context
LOW	raft.go	1025	// Step 3: send TimeoutNow message to target server.	COMMENT