Managing CodeScene

Overview

Manage CodeScene behavioral code analysis, including code health monitoring, hotspot detection, change coupling analysis, and pull request integration for automated code quality gates.

Key Capabilities

• Monitor code health scores across the codebase
• Detect and prioritize hotspots (frequently changed, complex code)
• Analyze change coupling between files and components
• Integrate with PRs for automated code health gate checks
• Track developer knowledge distribution and bus factor risks
• Visualize technical debt and prioritize refactoring efforts

Workflow

1 — Code Health Configuration

CODE HEALTH ANALYSIS
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
[ ] Analysis scope:
    - Repositories: ___
    - Branches: main, develop
    - Exclude patterns: test/**, vendor/**
[ ] Code health thresholds:
    - Healthy: 8-10
    - Warning: 4-7
    - Alert: 1-3
[ ] Analysis frequency: daily / weekly
[ ] Track trends over: 30 / 90 / 365 days

2 — Hotspot Detection

HOTSPOT CONFIGURATION
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
[ ] Hotspot criteria:
    - Change frequency: high
    - Code complexity: high
    - Combined priority score: frequency x complexity
[ ] Alert on new hotspots: YES / NO
[ ] Refactoring targets (top hotspots):
    File                    | Changes | Complexity | Health
    ────────────────────────┼─────────┼────────────┼───────
    src/core/processor.ts   | 45      | 82         | 2.1
    src/api/handlers.ts     | 38      | 67         | 3.4
    src/db/queries.ts       | 31      | 55         | 4.2

3 — PR Integration

PR CODE HEALTH GATES
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
[ ] Enable PR analysis: YES / NO
[ ] Block merge if code health declines: YES / NO
[ ] Minimum code health for new files: ___
[ ] Warn on changes to hotspots: YES / NO
[ ] PR comment with code health delta: YES / NO
[ ] Risk classification: low / medium / high

4 — Knowledge Distribution

KNOWLEDGE ANALYSIS
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
[ ] Bus factor analysis enabled: YES / NO
[ ] Knowledge map visualization: YES / NO
[ ] Alert on single-author components: YES / NO
[ ] Off-boarding risk assessment: YES / NO

Common Operations

Code Health Dashboard

View codebase health scores, trends, and degradation alerts.

Hotspot Prioritization

Identify highest-impact refactoring targets based on change frequency and complexity.

PR Risk Assessment

Evaluate pull request risk based on files changed, code health impact, and developer familiarity.

Troubleshooting

Issue	Cause	Fix
Low code health scores	Complex, frequently changed files	Prioritize hotspot refactoring
PR analysis not running	Integration not configured	Connect CodeScene to repository hosting
Stale analysis results	Analysis schedule too infrequent	Increase analysis frequency or trigger manually
False hotspot alerts	Test files included	Add test directories to exclusion patterns

Output Format

Present results as a structured report:

Managing Codescene Report
═════════════════════════
Resources discovered: [count]

Resource       Status    Key Metric    Issues
──────────────────────────────────────────────
[name]         [ok/warn] [value]       [findings]

Summary: [total] resources | [ok] healthy | [warn] warnings | [crit] critical
Action Items: [list of prioritized findings]

Target ≤50 lines of output. Use tables for multi-resource comparisons.

Anti-Hallucination Rules

1. NEVER assume resource names — always discover via CLI/API in Phase 1 before referencing in Phase 2.
2. NEVER fabricate metric names or dimensions — verify against the service documentation or --help output.
3. NEVER mix CLI commands between service versions — confirm which version/API you are targeting.
4. ALWAYS use the discovery → verify → analyze chain — every resource referenced must have been discovered first.
5. ALWAYS handle empty results gracefully — an empty response is valid data, not an error to retry.

Counter-Rationalizations

Shortcut	Counter	Why
"I'll skip discovery and check known resources"	Always run Phase 1 discovery first	Resource names change, new resources appear — assumed names cause errors
"The user only asked for a quick check"	Follow the full discovery → analysis flow	Quick checks miss critical issues; structured analysis catches silent failures
"Default configuration is probably fine"	Audit configuration explicitly	Defaults often leave logging, security, and optimization features disabled
"Metrics aren't needed for this"	Always check relevant metrics when available	API/CLI responses show current state; metrics reveal trends and intermittent issues
"I don't have access to that"	Try the command and report the actual error	Assumed permission failures prevent useful investigation; actual errors are informative