See the evidence before you install.

Inspect the exact report shape, then generate the same evidence on your repository.

Run this report on my repo Compare report formats

Illustrative sample output

Merge readiness evidence your team can inspect.

A Radar report is not just a score. It includes file locations, severity, why the finding matters, how to fix it, and export formats for CI or code scanning.

Security: 78
Code health: 91
Files: 412

Example structure, not a customer result. Run the same check on your repository for real evidence.

SeverityRuleFindingLocation

criticalSEC-SQLI-001Untrusted input reaches raw SQL constructionsrc/api/payments.ts:42

highSECRET-KEY-001Hardcoded token committed in configurationservices/auth/.env:12

mediumSCA-GHSA-9422Vulnerable transitive dependency in lockfileCargo.lock

infoSLOP-SIZE-001Oversized source file is hard to review safelysrc/routes/admin.ts:1

Report formats

Read the report as a review decision

The sample report is an illustrative model of how Code Radar explains a finding. Read the location, rule, severity, evidence, remediation direction, and output format together; no single badge or count is enough to decide whether code should merge.

A useful finding connects the risky code to an explainable reason and an actionable fix. Terminal, JSON, HTML, SARIF, and MCP outputs should preserve the same core evidence for different consumers.
The sample is not a customer result, performance claim, or guarantee about a visitor’s repository. Actual findings depend on language, files, configuration, rule coverage, and the code being scanned.
Generate the same report structure on your own repository, compare formats, repair one meaningful finding, rescan, and only then decide whether to add agent context or a GitHub Actions gate.

How to validate Read the report as a review decision

Use a real artifact and an explicit boundary for the decision. A claim is useful only when the visitor can inspect it, reproduce the relevant step, and understand what it does not prove.

Decision areaWhat to verify

EvidenceA useful finding connects the risky code to an explainable reason and an actionable fix. Terminal, JSON, HTML, SARIF, and MCP outputs should preserve the same core evidence for different consumers.

BoundaryThe sample is not a customer result, performance claim, or guarantee about a visitor’s repository. Actual findings depend on language, files, configuration, rule coverage, and the code being scanned.

Next stepGenerate the same report structure on your own repository, compare formats, repair one meaningful finding, rescan, and only then decide whether to add agent context or a GitHub Actions gate.

Questions about Read the report as a review decision

These answers connect the page promise to observable evidence, a clear limitation, and the next action that advances the workflow.

What evidence should I inspect for Read the report as a review decision?

Inspect this evidence: A useful finding connects the risky code to an explainable reason and an actionable fix. Terminal, JSON, HTML, SARIF, and MCP outputs should preserve the same core evidence for different consumers.

What does Read the report as a review decision not prove?

Keep this limitation explicit: The sample is not a customer result, performance claim, or guarantee about a visitor’s repository. Actual findings depend on language, files, configuration, rule coverage, and the code being scanned.

What should I do after reviewing Read the report as a review decision?

Use the next step that matches the decision: Generate the same report structure on your own repository, compare formats, repair one meaningful finding, rescan, and only then decide whether to add agent context or a GitHub Actions gate.

Continue with the right proof or implementation path.

These pages connect the current decision to a real artifact, installation step, workflow owner, or commercial boundary.

Code Radar

Decide with evidence, not a generic claim.

Verify the input scope, finding detail, workflow handoff, and product boundary before you install or buy.

radar scan . --quick
radar scan . --format html > radar.html

radar scan . --format sarif --fail-on high
radar scan . --format json > radar.json

Validate the workflow on your own code.

Start with one local scan, inspect the evidence, and expand to reports, agents, or CI only when the signal is useful.

Run this report on my repo Compare plans