Opencode Config

D 58 failed
Other
unknown / markdown · tiny
24
Files
4,063
LOC
0
Frameworks
2
Languages

Pipeline State

completed
Run ID
#407305
Phase
done
Progress
1%
Started
Finished
2026-04-13 01:31:02
LLM tokens
0
Previous runs
Source: Repobility analyzer (https://repobility.com)
#StatusPhaseStartedFinished
Provenance: Repobility (https://repobility.com) — every score reproducible from /scan/
#186653failedAI_REASONING2026-04-10 23:07:12

Pipeline Metadata

Stage
Skipped
Decision
skip_scaffold_dup
Novelty
22.93
Framework unique
Isolation
Last stage change
2026-04-16 18:15:42
Deduplication group #47247
Member of a group with 11,584 similar repo(s) — canonical #1453550 view group →
Repobility analyzer · published findings · https://repobility.com

AI Prompt

Create a configuration management system based on the "OpenCode Config Strategy (OC-CS)" principles. I need to manage model selection and environment-specific settings across different branches, like `model-strategy`, `office-windows`, and `main`. The system should use JSON files (like `opencode.json`) to store configurations, and I need a way to define which model is best for deep thinking (e.g., Claude 4.6 Opus) versus visual tasks (e.g., Gemini 3.1 Pro). The setup should guide users on how to update the model combination by merging changes from the main strategy branch into local environment branches.
markdown json configuration strategy model-management devops readme tech-guide
Generated by gemma4:latest

Catalog Information

Create a configuration management system based on the "OpenCode Config Strategy (OC-CS)" principles. I need to manage model selection and environment-specific settings across different branches, like model-strategy, office-windows, and main. The system should use JSON files (like opencode.json) to store configurations, and I need a way to define which model is best for deep thinking (e.g., Claude 4.6 Opus) versus visual tasks (e.g., Gemini 3.1 Pro). The setup should guide users on how to

Tags

markdown json configuration strategy model-management devops readme tech-guide

Quality Score

D
58.1/100
Structure
33
Code Quality
100
Documentation
30
Testing
0
Practices
80
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)

Security & Health

14
Vulnerabilities
0
Critical CVEs
8.6h
Tech Debt (D)
Medium
DORA Rating
Repobility · code-quality intelligence platform · https://repobility.com
A
OWASP (90%)
PASS
Quality Gate
0.0%
Duplication
Full Security Report AI Fix Prompts SARIF SBOM

Languages

markdown
53.4%
json
46.6%

Frameworks

None detected

Threat Findings

14
Total Threats
0
Critical
Powered by Repobility — scan your code at https://repobility.com
4
High
View Threat Intel

Quality Timeline

1 quality score recorded.

View File Metrics

Embed Badge

Add to your README:

![Quality](https://repos.aljefra.com/badge/185096.svg)
Quality BadgeSecurity Badge
Export Quality CSVDownload SBOMExport Findings CSV