All templates

Template

Codebase audit report template

A useful audit report does not bury the client in scanner output. It explains the codebase, ranks risk, and turns findings into a repair plan.

Section 1

Executive summary

Start with the business-facing readout: what is safe, what is risky, and what should happen next.

  • Repository name, stack, and audit date
  • Overall health verdict
  • Top 3 risks
  • Recommended next step

Section 2

Architecture map

Summarize entry points, domain modules, data stores, scheduled jobs, external services, and dependency hotspots.

  • Routes and API handlers
  • Database models and migrations
  • Queues, jobs, and webhooks
  • High fan-in or high fan-out modules

Section 3

Findings and evidence

Keep the findings short enough to act on. Each item should include severity, evidence, impact, and a suggested fix.

  • Security and secrets hygiene
  • Known vulnerable dependencies
  • Missing tests around critical flows
  • Duplication, oversized files, and dead code

Section 4

Repair roadmap

Close with a 30/60/90-day plan that separates critical risk from longer-term maintainability work.

  • Immediate containment work
  • High-value refactors
  • Documentation and onboarding repairs
  • Optional GitHub issues for accepted findings

How to use this template

  • Use this template before a project kickoff, takeover quote, or founder planning meeting. The goal is to make the first engineering conversation concrete enough that the next paid step is obvious.
  • Attach file paths, failing commands, screenshots, or dependency names to every critical and high finding. A report without evidence reads like opinion; a report with evidence becomes a decision artifact.
  • Keep the final version short enough for a non-technical buyer to read, then link to deeper technical evidence for the engineering team. This split is what turns an audit into a client-ready deliverable.
  • Review the report with the buyer before implementation starts. Accepted findings should become issues; rejected findings should be recorded as accepted risk rather than disappearing.
  • Use the same structure across projects so the buyer can compare repositories over time and your team can improve the audit process instead of rewriting it from scratch.

Generate this from a real repository

CodeTruss fills the report with architecture evidence, health scores, findings, and a prioritized issue roadmap.

Start free