Why is SonarQube rating our clean TypeScript code so poorly and how can we adjust the strict quality gates?
Download run
Fan-out diagram
The searches the AI actually ran for this prompt.
SEED QUERY
Why is SonarQube rating our clean TypeScript code so poorly and how can we adjust the strict quality gates?
2 real searches · 1 real-search pass
Badge and edge weight = share of passes that produced the query. Hover a query for its intent and routing format.
Query classes
Google's semantic query class for every sub-query: what kind of answer each search is after, simulated vs real.
ChatGPT real searches (2)
Classes come from the query-classifier (a local Laya model). 2 of 2 calls are low-confidence (under 50%) — hover a query in the table to see its confidence.
Searches and sources
ChatGPT2 real searches · gpt-6
SonarQube TypeScript quality profile quality gate configure thresholds exclusions coverage duplication official documentation Google ↗
SonarQube quality gate conditions new code maintainability reliability security rating official docs Google ↗
- Understanding quality gates | SonarQube Community Build · docs.sonarsource.com
- Setting your quality standards | SonarQube Cloud · docs.sonarsource.com
- Understanding quality gates | SonarQube Server 2026.1 LTA · docs.sonarsource.com
- Quality gates | SonarQube Server 10.8 · docs.sonarsource.com
- JavaScript/TypeScript/CSS | SonarQube Server · docs.sonarsource.com
- JavaScript/TypeScript test coverage | SonarQube Server 10.1 · docs.sonarsource.com
Queries
2 queries · click a column to sort
| Query / type | Search | Intent | Query class | Routing format | Cluster | Freq ↓ | Weight |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
SonarQube TypeScript quality profile quality gate configure thresholds exclusions coverage duplication official documentation OBSERVED | Google ↗ AI Mode ↗ | — | Comparison | — | — | 1x of 1 | |
SonarQube quality gate conditions new code maintainability reliability security rating official docs OBSERVED | Google ↗ AI Mode ↗ | — | Reason | — | — | 1x of 1 |