blindspot

Knowledge resilience report

Repository: /private/tmp/cohort10/n8n
Generated 2026-05-20 13:14 UTC · window: last 90 days · blindspot v0.2.0

Executive brief

Moderate Resilience 69/100 · D · multi org profile

Top 2 risks
  1. MEDIUM Diversify ownership of 'security' (currently single-owner) — security
  2. HIGH Stabilize delivery on packages/@n8n/workflow-sdk/src/types/base.ts — packages/@n8n/workflow-sdk/src/types/base.ts

Business implication An unexpected departure of the top contributor would orphan 949 critical files and likely slow feature delivery by 3–5 weeks while the team learns the surface.

Executive summary

Pair Declan Carroll (declan@n8n.io) on 'security' — bus factor 1 across 3 files

Resilience is **Moderate** (69/100). Weakest dimension: review hygiene (D).

Risk inventory: 1 service(s) rest on a single contributor; 949 file(s) would become orphans if the top contributor leaves; 240 file(s) carry high correction load (≥35% fix/revert); 6 service(s) lack AI-readable operational context.

Top recommended action: Pair Declan Carroll (declan@n8n.io) on 'security' — bus factor 1 across 3 files

Generated by rule-based · language: en · treat as advisory, verify against the data below.

💡 Want a richer, prose-style executive summary? Add a cloud LLM key (Anthropic or OpenAI) to your scan: 
--api-key sk-ant-... --provider anthropic --model claude-sonnet-4-6
or set narrative.api_key in .blindspot.yaml. Without a key, this rule-based narrator is used — deterministic, in-process, no network.

Overview

Engineering Resilience Score

Overall
69/100 D
Moderate

Moderate resilience overall (score 69). Weakest dimension: AI operational readiness at 0.

Multi-org / enterprise Concentration signals here are real risks, not artefacts.

Key signals — the six questions

Six concrete questions, each with a one-number answer. This is the report. Everything below is supporting detail; run with --detailed for the deep-dive sections.

Ownership concentration B
1 service rest on a single owner
If that person is unavailable, no one else can confidently change these areas.
Single-engineer dependency
949 files orphan if the top contributor leaves
These files would have no confident owner the day that person walks out.
Knowledge decay
No file is critically decayed
Owners are still close to the code they own.
Review depth
Reviews carry substantive comments
Approvals reflect real scrutiny, not rubber-stamping.
Correction load D
240 files carry a heavy bugfix tail
After each feature these files get a stream of fix/revert commits — stability is paying for delivery pace.
AI-readable context F
Repo lacks AI-readable operational context (1/5)
No specs, architecture notes / ADRs, prompts at the repo root — a new human or AI agent must reverse-engineer the codebase.

Recommended actions

Concrete next steps derived from the signals in this report. Each action is tied to a specific finding — treat them as conversation starters with the team, not directives.

Priority Confidence Category Title Target Evidence
High High Quality Guardrail Fragile velocity Stabilize delivery on packages/@n8n/workflow-sdk/src/types/base.ts
50% of recent commits to this file are follow-up fixes or reverts (4 of 8). Consider tightening review depth, adding regression tests, or pairing on the next non-trivial change to this surface.
▸ 50% of recent commits to this file are follow-up fixes or reverts — work surface ships fast but corrections pay the bill. 		packages/@n8n/workflow-sdk/src/types/base.ts correction_ratio=50%, fixes=4, reverts=0, total=8
Medium High Ownership Diversification Single-owner concentration Diversify ownership of 'security' (currently single-owner)
Service 'security' has bus factor 1 across 3 files; Declan Carroll (declan@n8n.io) holds 100% of effective ownership. Pair them with at least two additional engineers and rotate code reviews for this area over the next 60 days.
▸ Bus factor 1 over 3 files — Declan Carroll (declan@n8n.io) holds 100% of effective ownership. 		security bus_factor=1, top_owner_coverage=100%, files=3