▸case-16 Our team drafted the guideline: 'Services must avoid tight coupling and maintain clean abstraction boundaries.' We want to put this prose sentence directly into our CI automated build failure rules. Is this guideline ready for automated enforcement? | pass→pass | 64,413 | 79,465 | +23% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,921 | 3,186 | +66% | 0 | 0 | — |
▸case-09 Our Golang microservice project has 450 existing illegal imports between packages due to historical tech debt. A new feature branch added 3 additional illegal imports. Should we fail the build on all 453 violations, or suppress checks completely until legacy debt is cleaned up? | pass→pass | 42,315 | 25,599 | -40% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,138 | 3,359 | +57% | 0 | 0 | — |
▸case-01 Our web application monorepo is suffering from architectural drift—developers are frequently importing internal backend utilities and database models directly into frontend components. We want to convert our architectural guidelines into strict enforcement rules. Please analyze our repository and produce a comprehensive repo boundary specification. The output should cover our detected architecture and quality mappings, protected boundaries, diff-level checks for PRs, full repository audit checks, policies for handling historical debt baselines and allowlists, guidelines for generated snapshot reports, a garden loop for ongoing debt reduction, exact failure message structures to help developers fix violations, and a step-by-step rollout plan. | fail→pass | 45,969 | 49,963 | +9% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 8,312 | 5,836 | -30% | 0 | 0 | — |
▸case-02 We are modernizing a legacy codebase that has years of layered dependencies and cross-module imports. We need to block new structural drift immediately while allowing existing legacy violations to be grandfathered in until cleaned up. Provide a complete repository contract and boundary framework. Format your response to include: mapping of existing structural assets, protected boundary definitions, lightweight diff checks for modified files, repository-wide audit checks, baseline and allowlist management policies, rules for report snapshot generation, a continuous debt reduction loop, standard failure message shapes, and a rollout plan. | pass→pass | 70,097 | 67,969 | -3% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 8,297 | 6,923 | -17% | 0 | 0 | — |
▸case-03 We need to automate structural boundary enforcement across our service packages to stop unauthorized entrypoint bypasses and improper data access calls. Please establish executable quality and boundary checks for our project. Include sections for architectural mapping detection, protected rule definitions, PR diff validation, full audit checks, allowlist and baseline governance, snapshot report tracking, a debt gardening strategy, clear failure message templates, and rollout execution phases. | pass→pass | 39,671 | 37,635 | -5% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 8,268 | 7,040 | -15% | 0 | 0 | — |
▸case-15 We have frozen legacy dependency violations in a baseline file for our Kotlin monorepo, but team members worry baselines will remain permanent without active cleanup. How should a continuous debt reduction loop be structured? | fail→fail | 118,902 | 136,409 | +15% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,663 | 4,042 | +52% | 0 | 0 | — |
▸case-04 We have a Node.js Express server handling user registration and billing endpoints. We want to add runtime JSON Schema validation middleware to inspect incoming HTTP POST request payloads and return 400 Bad Request responses when body fields are missing or invalidly typed. Please write the Express middleware implementation and JSON Schema definitions. | pass→pass | 24,215 | 21,229 | -12% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 3,185 | 4,736 | +49% | 0 | 0 | — |
▸case-05 We need to configure our GitHub repository's `.github/workflows/ci.yml` workflow file to run automated tests, setup Node.js version caching, set concurrency groups for open pull requests, and matrix build across Ubuntu and macOS runners. Please write the complete workflow YAML file. | pass→pass | 11,856 | 10,799 | -9% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,826 | 2,922 | +60% | 0 | 0 | — |
▸case-06 We have a 3,000-line monolithic C# class `OrderProcessingService.cs` containing database queries, PDF generation, email sending, and payment processor calls. Please refactor this file by extracting independent classes and interfaces into separate C# source files. | pass→pass | 16,106 | 18,572 | +15% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 3,513 | 4,880 | +39% | 0 | 0 | — |
▸case-07 Developers are complaining that running full architecture dependency checks on every local git commit in our Python repository is too slow, but PRs are still slipping through with broken imports. Many team members suggest calculating a single 0-100 overall repository health score during PRs to simplify status reporting. How should the execution modes and status scoring be structured for speed and enforcement? | fail→pass | 21,499 | 21,053 | -2% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 3,396 | 4,460 | +31% | 0 | 0 | — |
▸case-08 When an automated boundary check fails during CI in our Java monorepo, developers get vague errors like 'Boundary error in module A'. We want to specify mandatory fields for every violation report so developers can fix issues immediately. What exact information must be reported? | fail→fail | 19,309 | 22,518 | +17% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,687 | 3,801 | +41% | 0 | 0 | — |
▸case-10 A team wants to add temporary exceptions to our layer architecture checker so a legacy service can import an internal database client directly. Should allowlist entries be simple path strings in a ignore text file, or do they require additional structured governance metadata? | pass→pass | 85,900 | 43,398 | -49% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,011 | 3,029 | +51% | 0 | 0 | — |
▸case-11 Our engineering lead wants to track structural quality in our TypeScript repository by combining test coverage percentage, average file size, line count per module, and duplicate code ratio into a single letter grade (A-F). Is this composite metric recommended for repo contract enforcement? | pass→pass | 59,994 | 245,191 | +309% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,530 | 3,144 | +24% | 0 | 0 | — |
▸case-12 We are adopting structural boundary checks on a C++ codebase that currently lacks architecture documentation, baseline files, and lint scripts. How should we proceed when architecture and contract files are missing? | fail→pass | 117,903 | 236,477 | +101% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,738 | 3,319 | +21% | 0 | 0 | — |
▸case-13 We generate structural dependency reports in our repository's `docs/reports/` folder. Recently these reports became out of sync with actual code because developers edited markdown files by hand. How should generated snapshot reports be managed to prevent silent staleness? | fail→fail | 20,600 | 114,801 | +457% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,385 | 3,019 | +27% | 0 | 0 | — |
▸case-14 We are setting up repository boundary contracts for a Rust workspace. A developer proposed jumping directly to writing rule scripts and allowlists before reading docs or assessing legacy debt. What execution sequence should be followed? | fail→pass | 128,994 | 16,457 | -87% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,355 | 2,759 | +17% | 0 | 0 | — |
▸case-17 In our Rust codebase, running full import graph analysis across all crates takes 4 minutes in CI. We want our pull request check to finish in under 5 seconds. How should pull request check scope be configured? | pass→pass | 29,233 | 33,112 | +13% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,790 | 3,930 | +41% | 0 | 0 | — |
▸case-18 A quality dashboard tool assigns our microservices repo a 95/100 Green score, even though two public API endpoints directly bypass security middleware to access private database models. Why is an aggregate score unsuitable for boundary enforcement? | pass→pass | 21,783 | 25,476 | +17% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,243 | 2,845 | +27% | 0 | 0 | — |
▸case-19 Our engineering team wants to deploy a dedicated Kubernetes cluster running a graph database and custom web dashboard to enforce 3 package dependency rules in a 10-developer repo. Is this infrastructure appropriate? | pass→pass | 27,912 | 22,181 | -21% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,182 | 3,379 | +55% | 0 | 0 | — |
▸case-20 When an automated agent breaks a layer contract in a pull request (for example, importing a database utility into a UI component), what information in the failure log enables the agent or developer to self-correct? | pass→pass | 20,882 | 22,295 | +7% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,467 | 3,302 | +34% | 0 | 0 | — |
▸case-21 When handling historical architectural debt in a legacy Python backend, should we hide violations by suppressing CI script error codes, or manage them transparently? | pass→pass | 21,926 | 20,805 | -5% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,494 | 3,338 | +34% | 0 | 0 | — |
▸case-22 What concrete mechanical methods should be used to enforce repository boundary contracts automatically rather than relying on manual code review? | pass→pass | 16,923 | 26,243 | +55% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,804 | 3,521 | +26% | 0 | 0 | — |