Output Formats
Debtmap provides multiple output formats to suit different workflows, from interactive terminal reports to machine-readable JSON for CI/CD integration. This chapter covers all available formats and how to use them effectively.
Format Selection
Select the output format using the -f or --format flag:
# Terminal output (default) - human-readable with colors
debtmap analyze .
# JSON output - machine-readable for tooling
debtmap analyze . --format json
# Markdown output - documentation and reports
debtmap analyze . --format markdown
Available formats:
- terminal (default): Interactive output with colors, emoji, and formatting
- json: Structured data for programmatic processing
- markdown: Reports suitable for documentation and PR comments
Note: The codebase also includes an
Htmlformat variant insrc/core/types.rsandsrc/analysis/diagnostics/, but this is only available internally for diagnostic reporting and is not exposed as a CLI option. For HTML output, convert markdown reports using tools like pandoc (see Rendering to HTML/PDF).
Writing to Files
By default, output goes to stdout. Use -o or --output to write to a file:
# Write JSON to file
debtmap analyze . --format json -o report.json
# Write markdown report
debtmap analyze . --format markdown -o DEBT_REPORT.md
# Terminal output to file (preserves colors)
debtmap analyze . -o analysis.txt
Terminal Output
The terminal format provides an interactive, color-coded report designed for developer workflows. It’s the default format and optimized for readability.
Output Structure
Terminal output is organized into five main sections:
- Header - Analysis report title
- Codebase Summary - High-level metrics and debt score
- Complexity Hotspots - Top 5 most complex functions with refactoring guidance
- Technical Debt - High-priority debt items requiring attention
- Pass/Fail Status - Overall quality assessment
Example Terminal Output
═══════════════════════════════════════════
DEBTMAP ANALYSIS REPORT
═══════════════════════════════════════════
📊 CODEBASE Summary
───────────────────────────────────────────
Files analyzed: 42
Total functions: 287
Average complexity: 6.3
Debt items: 15
Total debt score: 156 (threshold: 100)
⚠️ COMPLEXITY HOTSPOTS (Top 5)
───────────────────────────────────────────
1. src/analyzers/rust.rs:245 parse_function() - Cyclomatic: 18, Cognitive: 24
ACTION: Extract 3-5 pure functions using decompose-then-transform strategy
PATTERNS: Decompose into logical units, then apply functional patterns
BENEFIT: Pure functions are easily testable and composable
2. src/debt/smells.rs:196 detect_data_clumps() - Cyclomatic: 15, Cognitive: 20
↓ Entropy: 0.32, Repetition: 85%, Effective: 0.6x
High pattern repetition detected (85%)
🔧 TECHNICAL DEBT (15 items)
───────────────────────────────────────────
High Priority (5):
- src/risk/scoring.rs:142 - TODO: Implement caching for score calculations
- src/core/metrics.rs:89 - High complexity: cyclomatic=16
- src/debt/patterns.rs:201 - Code duplication: 65 lines duplicated
✓ Pass/Fail: PASS
Color Coding and Symbols
The terminal output uses colors and symbols for quick visual scanning:
Status Indicators:
- ✓ Green: Passing, good, well-tested
- ⚠️ Yellow: Warning, moderate complexity
- ✗ Red: Failing, critical, high complexity
- 📊 Blue: Information, metrics
- 🔧 Orange: Technical debt items
- 🎯 Cyan: Recommendations
Complexity Classification:
- LOW (0-5): Green - Simple, easy to maintain
- MODERATE (6-10): Yellow - Consider refactoring
- HIGH (11-15): Orange - Should refactor
- SEVERE (>15): Red - Urgent refactoring needed
Note: These levels match the
ComplexityLevelenum in the implementation.
Debt Score Thresholds:
The default debt threshold is 100. Scores are colored based on this threshold:
- Green (≤50): Healthy - Below half threshold (score ≤ threshold/2)
- Yellow (51-100): Attention needed - Between half and full threshold (threshold/2 < score ≤ threshold)
- Red (>100): Action required - Exceeds threshold (score > threshold)
Note: Boundary values use strict inequalities: 50 is Green, 100 is Yellow (not Red), 101+ is Red.
Refactoring Guidance
For complex functions (cyclomatic complexity > 5), the terminal output provides actionable refactoring recommendations:
ACTION: Extract 3-5 pure functions using decompose-then-transform strategy
PATTERNS: Decompose into logical units, then apply functional patterns
BENEFIT: Pure functions are easily testable and composable
Guidance levels:
- Moderate (6-10): Extract 2-3 pure functions using direct functional transformation
- High (11-15): Extract 3-5 pure functions using decompose-then-transform strategy
- Severe (>15): Extract 5+ pure functions into modules with functional core/imperative shell
See the Analysis Guide for metric explanations.
Plain Terminal Mode
For environments without color support or when piping to tools, use --plain:
# ASCII-only output, no colors
debtmap analyze . --plain
Plain mode:
- Removes ANSI color codes
- Uses ASCII box-drawing characters
- Machine-parseable structure
Note: Terminal output formatting is controlled internally via
FormattingConfig(found insrc/formattingandsrc/io/writers/terminal.rs), which manages color mode settings. The--plainflag and environment variables provide user-facing control over these settings:
--plainflag - Disables colors and fancy formattingNO_COLOR=1- Disables colors (per no-color.org standard)CLICOLOR=0- Disables colorsCLICOLOR_FORCE=1- Forces colors even when output is not a terminal
FormattingConfigis not directly exposed to CLI users but can be accessed when using debtmap as a library throughTerminalWriter::with_formatting.
Verbosity Levels
Control detail level with -v flags (can be repeated):
# Standard output
debtmap analyze .
# Level 1: Show main score factors
debtmap analyze . -v
# Level 2: Show detailed calculations
debtmap analyze . -vv
# Level 3: Show all debug information
debtmap analyze . -vvv
Verbosity features:
-v: Show main score factors (complexity, coverage, dependency breakdown)-vv: Show detailed calculations with formulas and intermediate values-vvv: Show all debug information including entropy metrics and role detection
Note: Verbosity flags affect terminal output only. JSON and markdown formats include all data regardless of verbosity level.
Each level includes all information from the previous levels, progressively adding more detail to help understand how scores are calculated.
Example Output Differences:
Standard output shows basic metrics:
Total debt score: 156 (threshold: 100)
Level 1 (-v) adds score breakdowns:
Total debt score: 156 (threshold: 100)
Complexity contribution: 85 (54%)
Coverage gaps: 45 (29%)
Dependency issues: 26 (17%)
Level 2 (-vv) adds detailed calculations:
Total debt score: 156 (threshold: 100)
Complexity contribution: 85 (54%)
Formula: sum(cyclomatic_weight * severity_multiplier)
High complexity functions: 5 × 12 = 60
Medium complexity: 8 × 3 = 24
Base penalty: 1
Coverage gaps: 45 (29%)
Uncovered complex functions: 3 × 15 = 45
Level 3 (-vvv) adds all internal details:
Total debt score: 156 (threshold: 100)
... (all level 2 output) ...
Debug info:
Entropy metrics analyzed: 42/50 functions
Function role detection: BusinessLogic=12, Utility=8, TestHelper=5
Parse time: 245ms
Understanding Metrics
To get detailed explanations of how metrics are calculated, use the --explain-metrics flag:
# Get explanations of metric definitions and formulas
debtmap analyze . --explain-metrics
This flag provides:
- Metric definitions - Detailed explanations of what each metric measures
- Calculation formulas - How scores are computed from raw data
- Measured vs estimated - Which metrics are exact and which are heuristic-based
- Interpretation guidance - How to understand and act on metric values
The explanations appear inline with the analysis output, helping you understand:
- What cyclomatic and cognitive complexity measure
- How debt scores are calculated
- What entropy metrics indicate
- How risk scores are determined
This is particularly useful when:
- Learning how debtmap evaluates code quality
- Understanding why certain functions have high scores
- Explaining analysis results to team members
- Tuning thresholds based on metric meanings
Risk Analysis Output
When coverage data is provided via --lcov, terminal output includes a dedicated risk analysis section:
═══════════════════════════════════════════
RISK ANALYSIS REPORT
═══════════════════════════════════════════
📈 RISK Summary
───────────────────────────────────────────
Codebase Risk Score: 45.5 (MEDIUM)
Complexity-Coverage Correlation: -0.65
Risk Distribution:
Critical: 2 functions
High: 5 functions
Medium: 10 functions
Low: 15 functions
Well Tested: 20 functions
🎯 CRITICAL RISKS
───────────────────────────────────────────
1. src/core/parser.rs:142 parse_complex_ast()
Risk: 85.0 | Complexity: 15 | Coverage: 0%
Recommendation: Add 5 unit tests (est: 2-3 hours)
Impact: -40 risk reduction
💡 RECOMMENDATIONS (by ROI)
───────────────────────────────────────────
1. test_me() - ROI: 5.0x
Current Risk: 75 | Reduction: 40 | Effort: Moderate
Rationale: High risk function with low coverage
Risk Level Classification:
- LOW (<30): Green - score < 30.0
- MEDIUM (30-59): Yellow - 30.0 ≤ score < 60.0
- HIGH (≥60): Red - score ≥ 60.0
Note: 60 is the start of HIGH risk level.
JSON Output
JSON output provides complete analysis results in a machine-readable format, ideal for CI/CD pipelines, custom tooling, and programmatic analysis.
Basic Usage
# Generate JSON output
debtmap analyze . --format json
# Save to file
debtmap analyze . --format json -o report.json
# Pretty-printed by default for readability
debtmap analyze . --format json | jq .
Note: JSON output is automatically pretty-printed for readability.
JSON Schema Structure
Debtmap outputs a structured JSON document with the following top-level fields:
{
"project_path": "/path/to/project",
"timestamp": "2025-01-09T12:00:00Z",
"complexity": { ... },
"technical_debt": { ... },
"dependencies": { ... },
"duplications": [ ... ]
}
Full Schema Example
Here’s a complete annotated JSON output example:
{
// Project metadata
"project_path": "/Users/dev/myproject",
"timestamp": "2025-01-09T15:30:00Z",
// Complexity analysis results
"complexity": {
"metrics": [
{
"name": "calculate_risk_score",
"file": "src/risk/scoring.rs",
"line": 142,
"cyclomatic": 12,
"cognitive": 18,
"nesting": 4,
"length": 85,
"is_test": false,
"visibility": "pub",
"is_trait_method": false,
"in_test_module": false,
"entropy_score": {
"token_entropy": 0.65,
"pattern_repetition": 0.30,
"branch_similarity": 0.45,
"effective_complexity": 0.85
},
"is_pure": false,
"purity_confidence": 0.75,
"detected_patterns": ["nested_loops", "complex_conditionals"],
"upstream_callers": ["analyze_codebase", "generate_report"],
"downstream_callees": ["get_metrics", "apply_weights"]
}
],
"summary": {
"total_functions": 287,
"average_complexity": 6.3,
"max_complexity": 24,
"high_complexity_count": 12
}
},
// Technical debt items
"technical_debt": {
"items": [
{
"id": "debt_001",
"debt_type": "Complexity",
"priority": "High",
"file": "src/analyzers/rust.rs",
"line": 245,
"column": 5,
"message": "High cyclomatic complexity: 18",
"context": "Function parse_function has excessive branching"
},
{
"id": "debt_002",
"debt_type": "Todo",
"priority": "Medium",
"file": "src/core/cache.rs",
"line": 89,
"column": null,
"message": "TODO: Implement LRU eviction policy",
"context": null
}
],
"by_type": {
"Complexity": [ /* same structure as items */ ],
"Todo": [ /* ... */ ],
"Duplication": [ /* ... */ ]
},
"priorities": ["Low", "Medium", "High", "Critical"]
},
// Dependency analysis
"dependencies": {
"modules": [
{
"module": "risk::scoring",
"dependencies": ["core::metrics", "debt::patterns"],
"dependents": ["commands::analyze", "io::output"]
}
],
"circular": [
{
"cycle": ["module_a", "module_b", "module_c", "module_a"]
}
]
},
// Code duplication blocks
"duplications": [
{
"hash": "abc123def456",
"lines": 15,
"locations": [
{
"file": "src/parser/rust.rs",
"start_line": 42,
"end_line": 57
},
{
"file": "src/parser/python.rs",
"start_line": 89,
"end_line": 104
}
]
}
]
}
Field Descriptions
FunctionMetrics Fields:
-
name: Function name -
file: Path to source file -
line: Line number where function is defined -
cyclomatic: Cyclomatic complexity score -
cognitive: Cognitive complexity score -
nesting: Maximum nesting depth -
length: Lines of code in function -
is_test: Whether this is a test function -
visibility: Rust visibility modifier (pub, pub(crate), or null) -
is_trait_method: Whether this implements a trait -
in_test_module: Whether inside #[cfg(test)] -
entropy_score: Optional entropy analysis with structure:{ "token_entropy": 0.65, // Token distribution entropy (0-1): measures variety of tokens "pattern_repetition": 0.30, // Pattern repetition score (0-1): detects repeated code patterns "branch_similarity": 0.45, // Branch similarity metric (0-1): compares similarity between branches "effective_complexity": 0.85 // Adjusted complexity multiplier: complexity adjusted for entropy }EntropyScore Fields:
token_entropy: Measures the variety and distribution of tokens in the function (0-1, higher = more variety)pattern_repetition: Detects repeated code patterns within the function (0-1, higher = more repetition)branch_similarity: Measures similarity between different code branches (0-1, higher = more similar)effective_complexity: The overall complexity multiplier adjusted for entropy effects
-
is_pure: Whether function is pure (no side effects) -
purity_confidence: Confidence level (0.0-1.0) -
detected_patterns: List of detected code patterns -
upstream_callers: Functions that call this one -
downstream_callees: Functions this one calls
DebtItem Fields:
id: Unique identifierdebt_type: Type of debt (see DebtType enum below)priority: Priority level (Low, Medium, High, Critical)file: Path to file containing debtline: Line numbercolumn: Optional column numbermessage: Human-readable descriptioncontext: Optional additional context
DebtType Enum:
Todo: TODO markersFixme: FIXME markersCodeSmell: Code smell patternsDuplication: Duplicated codeComplexity: Excessive complexityDependency: Dependency issuesErrorSwallowing: Suppressed errorsResourceManagement: Resource management issuesCodeOrganization: Organizational problemsTestComplexity: Complex test codeTestTodo: TODOs in testsTestDuplication: Duplicated test codeTestQuality: Test quality issues
JSON Format Variants
Debtmap supports two JSON output formats:
# Legacy format (default) - backward compatible
debtmap analyze . --format json --output-format legacy
# Unified format - new consistent structure
debtmap analyze . --format json --output-format unified
Note: The
--output-formatflag only applies when using--format json. It has no effect with markdown or terminal formats.
Format Comparison
Legacy format: Uses {File: {...}} and {Function: {...}} wrappers for backward compatibility with existing tooling.
Unified format: Consistent structure with a type field, making parsing simpler and more predictable. Recommended for new integrations.
When to use each format:
-
Use legacy format if:
- You have existing tooling that expects the old structure
- You need backward compatibility with version 1.x parsers
- You’re integrating with third-party tools expecting the legacy format
-
Use unified format for:
- All new integrations and tooling
- Cleaner, more predictable JSON parsing
- Future-proof implementations
- Simpler type discrimination in statically-typed languages
Migration strategy:
The legacy format will be maintained for backward compatibility, but unified is the recommended format going forward. If you’re starting a new integration, use unified format from the beginning. If migrating existing tooling:
- Test unified format with a subset of your codebase
- Update parsers to handle the
typefield instead of key-based discrimination - Validate results match between legacy and unified formats
- Switch to unified format once validation passes
Structural Differences
Legacy format example:
{
"complexity": {
"metrics": [
{
"File": {
"path": "src/main.rs",
"functions": 12,
"average_complexity": 5.3
}
},
{
"Function": {
"name": "calculate_score",
"file": "src/scoring.rs",
"line": 42,
"cyclomatic": 8
}
}
]
}
}
Unified format example:
{
"complexity": {
"metrics": [
{
"type": "File",
"path": "src/main.rs",
"functions": 12,
"average_complexity": 5.3
},
{
"type": "Function",
"name": "calculate_score",
"file": "src/scoring.rs",
"line": 42,
"cyclomatic": 8
}
]
}
}
Key difference: Legacy uses {File: {...}} wrapper objects, while unified uses a flat structure with "type": "File" field. This makes unified format easier to parse in most programming languages.
Risk Insights JSON
When coverage data is provided via --lcov, risk insights are included as part of the analysis output. The write_risk_insights method (found in src/io/writers/json.rs, terminal.rs, and markdown/core.rs) outputs risk analysis data in the following JSON structure:
{
"items": [
{
"location": {
"file": "src/risk/scoring.rs",
"function": "calculate_priority",
"line": 66
},
"debt_type": "TestGap",
"unified_score": {
"complexity_factor": 3.2,
"coverage_factor": 10.0,
"dependency_factor": 2.5,
"role_multiplier": 1.2,
"final_score": 9.4
},
"function_role": "BusinessLogic",
"recommendation": {
"action": "Add unit tests",
"details": "Add 6 unit tests for full coverage",
"effort_estimate": "2-3 hours"
},
"expected_impact": {
"risk_reduction": 3.9,
"complexity_reduction": 0,
"coverage_improvement": 100
},
"upstream_dependencies": 0,
"downstream_dependencies": 3,
"nesting_depth": 1,
"function_length": 13
}
],
"call_graph": {
"total_functions": 1523,
"entry_points": 12,
"test_functions": 456,
"max_depth": 8
},
"overall_coverage": 82.3,
"total_impact": {
"risk_reduction": 45.2,
"complexity_reduction": 12.3,
"coverage_improvement": 18.5
}
}
Markdown Output
Markdown format generates documentation-friendly reports suitable for README files, PR comments, and technical documentation.
Basic Usage
# Generate markdown report
debtmap analyze . --format markdown
# Save to documentation
debtmap analyze . --format markdown -o docs/DEBT_REPORT.md
Markdown Structure
Markdown output includes:
- Executive Summary - High-level metrics and health dashboard
- Complexity Analysis - Detailed complexity breakdown by file
- Technical Debt - Categorized debt items with priorities
- Dependencies - Module dependencies and circular references
- Recommendations - Prioritized action items
Example Markdown Output
# Debtmap Analysis Report
**Generated:** 2025-01-09 15:30:00 UTC
**Project:** /Users/dev/myproject
## Executive Summary
- **Files Analyzed:** 42
- **Total Functions:** 287
- **Average Complexity:** 6.3
- **Total Debt Items:** 15
- **Debt Score:** 156/100 ⚠️
### Health Dashboard
| Metric | Value | Status |
|--------|-------|--------|
| Complexity | 6.3 avg | ✅ Good |
| Debt Score | 156 | ⚠️ Attention |
| High Priority Items | 5 | ⚠️ Action Needed |
## Complexity Analysis
### Top 5 Complex Functions
| Function | File | Cyclomatic | Cognitive | Priority |
|----------|------|-----------|-----------|----------|
| parse_function | src/analyzers/rust.rs:245 | 18 | 24 | High |
| detect_data_clumps | src/debt/smells.rs:196 | 15 | 20 | Medium |
| analyze_dependencies | src/core/deps.rs:89 | 14 | 18 | Medium |
### Refactoring Recommendations
**src/analyzers/rust.rs:245** - `parse_function()`
- **Complexity:** Cyclomatic: 18, Cognitive: 24
- **Action:** Extract 3-5 pure functions using decompose-then-transform strategy
- **Patterns:** Decompose into logical units, then apply functional patterns
- **Benefit:** Improved testability and maintainability
## Technical Debt
### High Priority (5 items)
- **src/risk/scoring.rs:142** - TODO: Implement caching for score calculations
- **src/core/metrics.rs:89** - High complexity: cyclomatic=16
- **src/debt/patterns.rs:201** - Code duplication: 65 lines duplicated
### Medium Priority (8 items)
...
## Dependencies
### Circular Dependencies
- `risk::scoring` → `core::metrics` → `risk::scoring`
## Recommendations
1. **Refactor parse_function** (High Priority)
- Reduce complexity from 18 to <10
- Extract helper functions
- Estimated effort: 4-6 hours
2. **Add tests for scoring module** (High Priority)
- Current coverage: 35%
- Target coverage: 80%
- Estimated effort: 2-3 hours
CLI vs Library Markdown Features
CLI Markdown Output (--format markdown):
When you use debtmap analyze . --format markdown, you get comprehensive reports that include:
- Executive summary with health dashboard
- Complexity analysis with refactoring recommendations
- Technical debt categorization by priority
- Dependency analysis with circular reference detection
- Actionable recommendations
This uses the base MarkdownWriter implementation and provides everything needed for documentation and PR comments.
Enhanced Library Features:
If you’re using debtmap as a Rust library in your own tools, additional markdown capabilities are available:
EnhancedMarkdownWritertrait (src/io/writers/markdown/enhanced.rs) - Provides advanced formatting and analysis features- Enhanced markdown modules (
src/io/writers/enhanced_markdown/) - Building blocks for custom visualizations including:- Priority-based debt rankings with unified scoring
- Dead code detection and reporting
- Call graph insights and dependency visualization
- Testing recommendations with ROI analysis
To use enhanced features in your Rust code:
#![allow(unused)]
fn main() {
use debtmap::io::writers::markdown::enhanced::EnhancedMarkdownWriter;
use debtmap::io::writers::enhanced_markdown::*;
// Create custom reports with enhanced features
let mut writer = create_enhanced_writer(output)?;
writer.write_priority_rankings(&analysis)?;
writer.write_dead_code_analysis(&call_graph)?;
}
Note: Enhanced markdown features are only available through the library API, not via the CLI. The CLI
--format markdownoutput is comprehensive for most use cases.
Rendering to HTML/PDF
Markdown reports can be converted to other formats:
# Generate markdown
debtmap analyze . --format markdown -o report.md
# Convert to HTML with pandoc
pandoc report.md -o report.html --standalone --css style.css
# Convert to PDF
pandoc report.md -o report.pdf --pdf-engine=xelatex
Tool Integration
CI/CD Pipelines
Debtmap JSON output integrates seamlessly with CI/CD systems.
GitHub Actions
name: Code Quality
on: [pull_request]
jobs:
analyze:
runs-on: ubuntu-latest
steps:
- uses: actions/checkout@v3
- name: Install debtmap
run: cargo install debtmap
- name: Run analysis
run: |
debtmap analyze . \
--format json \
--output analysis.json \
--lcov coverage/lcov.info
- name: Check thresholds
run: |
DEBT_SCORE=$(jq '.technical_debt.items | length' analysis.json)
if [ "$DEBT_SCORE" -gt 100 ]; then
echo "❌ Debt score too high: $DEBT_SCORE"
exit 1
fi
- name: Comment on PR
uses: actions/github-script@v6
with:
script: |
const fs = require('fs');
const analysis = JSON.parse(fs.readFileSync('analysis.json'));
const summary = `## Debtmap Analysis
- **Debt Items:** ${analysis.technical_debt.items.length}
- **Average Complexity:** ${analysis.complexity.summary.average_complexity}
- **High Complexity Functions:** ${analysis.complexity.summary.high_complexity_count}
`;
github.rest.issues.createComment({
issue_number: context.issue.number,
owner: context.repo.owner,
repo: context.repo.repo,
body: summary
});
GitLab CI
code_quality:
stage: test
script:
- cargo install debtmap
- debtmap analyze . --format json --output gl-code-quality.json
- |
DEBT=$(jq '.technical_debt.items | length' gl-code-quality.json)
if [ "$DEBT" -gt 50 ]; then
echo "Debt threshold exceeded"
exit 1
fi
artifacts:
reports:
codequality: gl-code-quality.json
Jenkins Pipeline
pipeline {
agent any
stages {
stage('Analyze') {
steps {
sh 'debtmap analyze . --format json -o report.json'
script {
def json = readJSON file: 'report.json'
def debtScore = json.technical_debt.items.size()
if (debtScore > 100) {
error("Debt score ${debtScore} exceeds threshold")
}
}
}
}
}
post {
always {
archiveArtifacts artifacts: 'report.json'
}
}
}
Querying JSON with jq
Common jq queries for analyzing debtmap output:
# Get total debt items
jq '.technical_debt.items | length' report.json
# Get high-priority items only
jq '.technical_debt.items[] | select(.priority == "High")' report.json
# Get functions with complexity > 10
jq '.complexity.metrics[] | select(.cyclomatic > 10)' report.json
# Calculate average complexity
jq '.complexity.summary.average_complexity' report.json
# Get all TODO items
jq '.technical_debt.items[] | select(.debt_type == "Todo")' report.json
# Get top 5 complex functions
jq '.complexity.metrics | sort_by(-.cyclomatic) | .[0:5] | .[] | {name, file, cyclomatic}' report.json
# Get files with circular dependencies
jq '.dependencies.circular[] | .cycle' report.json
# Count debt items by type
jq '.technical_debt.items | group_by(.debt_type) | map({type: .[0].debt_type, count: length})' report.json
# Get functions with 0% coverage (when using --lcov)
jq '.complexity.metrics[] | select(.coverage == 0)' report.json
# Extract file paths with high debt
jq '.technical_debt.items[] | select(.priority == "High" or .priority == "Critical") | .file' report.json | sort -u
Filtering and Transformation Examples
Python Script to Parse JSON
#!/usr/bin/env python3
import json
import sys
def analyze_debtmap_output(json_file):
with open(json_file) as f:
data = json.load(f)
# Get high-priority items
high_priority = [
item for item in data['technical_debt']['items']
if item['priority'] in ['High', 'Critical']
]
# Group by file
by_file = {}
for item in high_priority:
file = item['file']
if file not in by_file:
by_file[file] = []
by_file[file].append(item)
# Print summary
print(f"High-priority debt items: {len(high_priority)}")
print(f"Files affected: {len(by_file)}")
print("\nBy file:")
for file, items in sorted(by_file.items(), key=lambda x: -len(x[1])):
print(f" {file}: {len(items)} items")
return by_file
if __name__ == '__main__':
analyze_debtmap_output(sys.argv[1])
Shell Script for Threshold Checking
#!/bin/bash
set -e
REPORT="$1"
DEBT_THRESHOLD=100
COMPLEXITY_THRESHOLD=10
# Check debt score
DEBT_SCORE=$(jq '.technical_debt.items | length' "$REPORT")
if [ "$DEBT_SCORE" -gt "$DEBT_THRESHOLD" ]; then
echo "❌ Debt score $DEBT_SCORE exceeds threshold $DEBT_THRESHOLD"
exit 1
fi
# Check average complexity
AVG_COMPLEXITY=$(jq '.complexity.summary.average_complexity' "$REPORT")
if (( $(echo "$AVG_COMPLEXITY > $COMPLEXITY_THRESHOLD" | bc -l) )); then
echo "❌ Average complexity $AVG_COMPLEXITY exceeds threshold $COMPLEXITY_THRESHOLD"
exit 1
fi
echo "✅ All quality checks passed"
echo " Debt score: $DEBT_SCORE/$DEBT_THRESHOLD"
echo " Avg complexity: $AVG_COMPLEXITY"
Editor Integration
VS Code Tasks
Create .vscode/tasks.json:
{
"version": "2.0.0",
"tasks": [
{
"label": "Debtmap: Analyze",
"type": "shell",
"command": "debtmap",
"args": [
"analyze",
".",
"--format",
"terminal"
],
"problemMatcher": [],
"presentation": {
"reveal": "always",
"panel": "new"
}
},
{
"label": "Debtmap: Generate Report",
"type": "shell",
"command": "debtmap",
"args": [
"analyze",
".",
"--format",
"markdown",
"-o",
"DEBT_REPORT.md"
],
"problemMatcher": []
}
]
}
Problem Matcher for VS Code
Parse debtmap output in VS Code’s Problems panel:
{
"problemMatcher": {
"owner": "debtmap",
"fileLocation": "absolute",
"pattern": {
"regexp": "^(.+?):(\\d+):(\\d+)?\\s*-\\s*(.+)$",
"file": 1,
"line": 2,
"column": 3,
"message": 4
}
}
}
Webhook Integration
Send debtmap results to webhooks for notifications:
#!/bin/bash
# Run analysis
debtmap analyze . --format json -o report.json
# Send to Slack
DEBT_SCORE=$(jq '.technical_debt.items | length' report.json)
curl -X POST "$SLACK_WEBHOOK_URL" \
-H 'Content-Type: application/json' \
-d "{\"text\": \"Debtmap Analysis Complete\n• Debt Score: $DEBT_SCORE\n• High Priority: $(jq '[.technical_debt.items[] | select(.priority == "High")] | length' report.json)\"}"
# Send to custom webhook
curl -X POST "$CUSTOM_WEBHOOK_URL" \
-H 'Content-Type: application/json' \
-d @report.json
Output Filtering
Debtmap provides several flags to filter and limit output:
Note: Filtering options (
--top,--tail,--summary,--filter) apply to all output formats (terminal, JSON, and markdown). The filtered data is applied at the analysis level before formatting, ensuring consistent results across all output types.
Limiting Results
# Show only top 10 priority items
debtmap analyze . --top 10
# Show bottom 5 lowest priority items
debtmap analyze . --tail 5
Priority Filtering
# Show only high and critical priority items
debtmap analyze . --min-priority high
# Filter by specific debt categories
debtmap analyze . --filter Architecture,Testing
Available categories:
Architecture: God objects, complexity hotspots, dead codeTesting: Testing gaps, coverage issuesPerformance: Resource leaks, inefficient patternsCodeQuality: Code smells, maintainability
Grouping Output
# Group results by debt category
debtmap analyze . --group-by-category
# Combine filters for focused analysis
debtmap analyze . --filter Architecture --min-priority high --top 5
Summary Mode
# Compact tiered priority display
debtmap analyze . --summary
# Combines well with filtering
debtmap analyze . --summary --min-priority medium
Best Practices
When to Use Each Format
Use Terminal Format When:
- Developing locally and reviewing code
- Getting quick feedback on changes
- Presenting results to team members
- Exploring complexity hotspots interactively
Use JSON Format When:
- Integrating with CI/CD pipelines
- Building custom analysis tools
- Tracking metrics over time
- Programmatically processing results
- Feeding into dashboards or monitoring systems
Use Markdown Format When:
- Generating documentation
- Creating PR comments
- Sharing reports with stakeholders
- Archiving analysis results
- Producing executive summaries
Quick Reference Table
| Format | Best For | Machine Readable | Human Readable | File Extension |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Terminal | Development | No | Yes | .txt |
| JSON | Automation | Yes | No | .json |
| Markdown | Documentation | Partially | Yes | .md |
Combining Formats
Use multiple formats for comprehensive workflows:
# Generate terminal output for review
debtmap analyze .
# Generate JSON for automation
debtmap analyze . --format json -o ci-report.json
# Generate markdown for documentation
debtmap analyze . --format markdown -o docs/DEBT.md
Performance Considerations
- Terminal format: Fastest, minimal overhead
- JSON format: Fast serialization, efficient for large codebases
- Markdown format: Slightly slower due to formatting, but still performant
For very large codebases (>10,000 files), use --top or --filter to limit output size.
Troubleshooting
Common Issues
Colors not showing in terminal:
- Check if terminal supports ANSI colors
- Use
--plainflag for ASCII-only output - Some CI systems may not support color codes
JSON parsing errors:
- Ensure output is complete (check for errors during analysis)
- Validate JSON with
jqor online validators - Check for special characters in file paths
Markdown rendering issues:
- Some markdown renderers don’t support all features
- Use standard markdown for maximum compatibility
- Test with pandoc or GitHub/GitLab preview
File encoding problems:
- Ensure UTF-8 encoding for all output files
- Use
--plainfor pure ASCII output - Check locale settings (LC_ALL, LANG environment variables)
Exit Codes
Current behavior (as verified in src/main.rs):
0: Successful analysis completed without errors- Non-zero: Error during analysis (invalid path, parsing error, etc.)
Note: Threshold-based exit codes (where analysis succeeds but fails quality gates) are not currently implemented. The
analyzecommand returns 0 on successful analysis regardless of debt scores or complexity thresholds.
To enforce quality gates based on thresholds, use the validate command or parse JSON output:
# Use validate command for threshold enforcement
debtmap validate . --config debtmap.toml
# Or parse JSON output for threshold checking
debtmap analyze . --format json -o report.json
DEBT_SCORE=$(jq '.technical_debt.items | length' report.json)
if [ "$DEBT_SCORE" -gt 100 ]; then
echo "Debt threshold exceeded"
exit 1
fi
See Also
- Getting Started - Basic usage and examples
- Analysis Guide - Understanding metrics and scores
- Configuration - Customizing analysis behavior