Code health scanner for technical debt and review risk.

Radar flags duplicate code, oversized files, churn, dead code signals, and AI-generated change risk before technical debt reaches a pull request.

Run this check locally Inspect sample finding

radar scan . --quick

Technical debt scanner

Use code-health findings as review triage, not vanity metrics. Radar highlights the patterns that make a change harder to review or safer to defer.

Duplicate code detector
Large file code smell scanner
Generated-code risk
Review action plan

Code health

Evidence to inspect

Use “Code health scanner for technical debt and review risk.” as the scope for this decision: verify the input, finding detail, workflow handoff, and product boundary before you install or buy.

CriterionEvidence to inspectBoundary

Input scopeSelected files, configuration, scan mode, and enabled rules.Only included paths and configured checks are evaluated.

Finding detailFile, line, rule ID, severity, explanation, and repair direction.Illustrative output is not a result from your repository.

Workflow handoffLocal result, report format, agent context, and optional CI signal.Enable exports or CI only when the workflow needs them.

Decision fitUse the same criteria on a real repository before choosing a plan or tool.No universal winner or guaranteed outcome is claimed.

Code health

Run this check locally

Same evidence as security

Code-health findings share the same terminal, SARIF, JSON, and HTML report formats as SAST and dependency findings.

Official source

Primary sources

NISTSecure Software Development Framework (SSDF) 1.1
GitHub DocsUploading a SARIF file to GitHub

Validate the workflow on your own code.

Apply this page’s evidence to one real repository. For “Code health scanner for technical debt and review risk.”, confirm which finding is produced, whether the proposed next step is reproducible, and where local scanning, reports, agents, or CI should stop or expand.