Mantis Common

D 57 completed
Other
unknown / protobuf · tiny
5
Files
177
LOC
0
Frameworks
2
Languages

Pipeline State

completed
Run ID
#1507065
Phase
done
Progress
0%
Started
2026-04-16 13:10:41
Finished
2026-04-16 13:10:41
LLM tokens
0

Pipeline Metadata

Stage
Skipped
Decision
skip_tiny
Novelty
22.58
Framework unique
Isolation
Last stage change
2026-04-16 18:15:42
Deduplication group #52634
Member of a group with 19 similar repo(s) — canonical #1520622 view group →
Source: Repobility analyzer · https://repobility.com

AI Prompt

Create a shared library structure for defining common protobuf messages for the Mantis Exchange microservices. I need to define common types like Order, Trade, Side, OrderType, and DepthLevel in `proto/mantis/types.proto`. Additionally, please set up definitions for the MatchingEngine gRPC service in `proto/mantis/matching.proto` and the OrderService gRPC service in `proto/mantis/order.proto`. The setup should also include instructions or examples for generating code using `protoc` for Go and for using `tonic-build` in Rust.
protobuf grpc protobuf-compiler proto protobuf-messages microservices go rust api-definition
Generated by gemma4:latest

Catalog Information

Create a shared library structure for defining common protobuf messages for the Mantis Exchange microservices. I need to define common types like Order, Trade, Side, OrderType, and DepthLevel in proto/mantis/types.proto. Additionally, please set up definitions for the MatchingEngine gRPC service in proto/mantis/matching.proto and the OrderService gRPC service in proto/mantis/order.proto. The setup should also include instructions or examples for generating code using protoc for Go and fo

Tags

protobuf grpc protobuf-compiler proto protobuf-messages microservices go rust api-definition

Quality Score

D
57.2/100
Structure
30
Code Quality
100
Documentation
30
Testing
0
Practices
78
Security
100
Dependencies
50

Strengths

  • Low average code complexity — well-structured code
  • Good security practices — no major issues detected

Weaknesses

  • No LICENSE file — legal ambiguity for contributors
  • No tests found — high risk of regressions
  • No CI/CD configuration — manual testing and deployment

Recommendations

  • Add a test suite — start with critical path integration tests
  • Set up CI/CD (GitHub Actions recommended) to automate testing and deployment
  • Add a linter configuration to enforce code style consistency
  • Add a LICENSE file (MIT recommended for open source)

Languages

protobuf
84.7%
markdown
15.3%

Frameworks

None detected

Quality Timeline

1 quality score recorded.

View File Metrics

Embed Badge

Add to your README:

![Quality](https://repos.aljefra.com/badge/1198708.svg)
Quality BadgeSecurity Badge
Export Quality CSVDownload SBOMExport Findings CSV