AI Slop Code Risk Monitor

shipshapecode/shepherd

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

Guide your users through a tour of your app

1.0 Low pattern signal View on GitHub

Open-Source Code Quality, Security and Technical Debt Review

This report summarizes scanner evidence for shipshapecode/shepherd, a JavaScript project with 13,833 GitHub stars. SynthScan examined 39,829 lines of code across 173 source files, recording 32 pattern matches distributed across 3 syntactic categories. The legacy adjusted pattern signal is 1.0 (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.

1.0
Adjusted Signal
1.0
Raw Pattern Score
100%
Time Factor
2026-10-29
Last Push
13.8K
Stars
JavaScript
Language
39.8K
Lines of Code
173
Files
32
Pattern Hits
2026-10-31
Scan Date
0.01
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 1.1/100 · LOW

Can maintainers explain intent, assumptions, and trade-offs? 9 finding(s).

Hallucinated Dependency & Supply Chain Risk 3.6/100 · LOW

Are imports declared and package/API names verified? 23 finding(s).

Agent Over-Engineering Ratio 0.0/100 · LOW

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

PR Review Velocity Impact 4.5/100 · LOW

Which changes need focused human review? 32 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 31

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 32 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.

Fake / Example Data22 hits · 22 pts
SeverityFileLineSnippetContext
LOWshepherd.js/test/unit/step.spec.js317 text: 'Lorem Ipsum',CODE
LOWshepherd.js/test/unit/step.spec.js583 text: 'Lorem Ipsum',CODE
LOWshepherd.js/test/unit/step.spec.js605 text: 'Lorem Ipsum',CODE
LOWshepherd.js/test/unit/utils/bind.spec.js67 text: 'Lorem ipsum dolor: <a href="https://example.com">sit amet</a>',CODE
LOW…pherd.js/test/unit/components/shepherd-element.spec.js424 const { element, cleanup } = build({ text: 'Lorem Ipsum' });CODE
LOW…pherd.js/test/unit/components/shepherd-element.spec.js434 text: 'Lorem Ipsum',CODE
LOW…pherd.js/test/unit/components/shepherd-element.spec.js446 text: 'Lorem Ipsum',CODE
LOW…pherd.js/test/unit/components/shepherd-element.spec.js459 text: 'Lorem Ipsum',CODE
LOW…pherd.js/test/unit/components/shepherd-element.spec.js476 text: 'Lorem Ipsum',CODE
LOW…pherd.js/test/unit/components/shepherd-element.spec.js497 { text: 'Lorem Ipsum' },CODE
LOW…pherd.js/test/unit/components/shepherd-element.spec.js508 { text: 'Lorem Ipsum' },CODE
LOW…pherd.js/test/unit/components/shepherd-element.spec.js519 text: 'Lorem Ipsum',CODE
LOW…pherd.js/test/unit/components/shepherd-element.spec.js533 text: 'Lorem Ipsum',CODE
LOW…pherd.js/test/unit/components/shepherd-element.spec.js549 text: 'Lorem Ipsum',CODE
LOW…pherd.js/test/unit/components/shepherd-element.spec.js560 text: 'Lorem Ipsum',CODE
LOW…pherd.js/test/unit/components/shepherd-element.spec.js571 const { element, cleanup } = build({ text: 'Lorem Ipsum', label: '' });CODE
LOW…pherd.js/test/unit/components/shepherd-element.spec.js580 text: 'Lorem Ipsum',CODE
LOW…pherd.js/test/unit/components/shepherd-element.spec.js591 text: 'Lorem Ipsum',CODE
LOW…pherd.js/test/unit/components/shepherd-element.spec.js602 text: 'Lorem Ipsum',CODE
LOW…pherd.js/test/unit/components/shepherd-element.spec.js614 const { element, cleanup } = build({ text: 'Lorem Ipsum', label: {} });CODE
LOW…pherd.js/test/unit/components/shepherd-element.spec.js623 text: 'Lorem Ipsum',CODE
LOW…pherd.js/test/unit/components/shepherd-element.spec.js634 text: 'Lorem Ipsum',CODE
Over-Commented Block9 hits · 9 pts
SeverityFileLineSnippetContext
LOWlanding/src/env.d.ts1/// <reference path="../.astro/types.d.ts" />COMMENT
LOWshepherd.js/tsconfig.json21 // like a safety check, though, so we leave it on.COMMENT
LOWshepherd.js/test/unit/components/shepherd-modal.spec.js521COMMENT
LOWshepherd.js/test/cypress/support/index.js1require('cypress-plugin-tab');COMMENT
LOWshepherd.js/test/cypress/support/index.js21// Alternatively you can use CommonJS syntax:COMMENT
LOWshepherd.js/test/cypress/support/commands.js1// ***********************************************COMMENT
LOWshepherd.js/test/cypress/support/commands.js21// Cypress.Commands.add("dismiss", { prevSubject: 'optional'}, (subject, options) => { ... })COMMENT
LOWshepherd.js/src/components/shepherd-element.ts41 const hasCancelIcon = step.options?.cancelIcon?.enabled ?? false;COMMENT
LOWdocs-src/src/env.d.ts1/// <reference path="../.astro/types.d.ts" />COMMENT
Cross-Language Confusion (JS/TS)1 hit · 8 pts
SeverityFileLineSnippetContext
HIGHshepherd.js/src/step.ts586 * @return True if the step is open and visibleCOMMENT