Example verdict on one dependency-bot pull request: what changed, what uses it, what to hold

This verdict is synthetic

The shop, the package and every finding below are invented. The example shows the fields a buyer should expect. A real verdict quotes the actual changelog and lockfile.

The verdict

Read it top to bottom: the decision, the evidence, then what was not examined.

If the matrix is wider than the box, scroll horizontally to read every column. Keyboard: focus the matrix and use Left/Right.

SYNTHETIC EXAMPLE: bot pull request "Bump imagekit-lite from 2.3.1 to 2.4.0" in an invented shop.

VERDICT   HOLD (decision needed)

WHAT CHANGED
  Changelog   2.4.0 renames resize() to scale() and keeps resize() as deprecated
  Link        not shown: the package is invented

DOES YOUR CODE USE IT
  Yes   src/images/thumbs.js line 41 calls resize(); still works in 2.4.0, prints a warning

CI RESULT
  Passed on the pull request branch; 212 tests, none skipped

LOCKFILE CHECK
  New indirect package   mini-exif 0.4.2 (not in the lockfile before)
  mini-exif   first published 9 days ago; one maintainer; has an install script
  Registry lookup   package exists

WHY HOLD
  A new indirect package is very new and runs an install script. Your rule says hold below 30 days.

NO ISSUE FOUND IN WHAT WE EXAMINED
  The bump itself shows no breaking change for your use.

NOT EXAMINED
  - source code of the new package
  - behaviour in production
  - whether the maintainer account is secure

This verdict informs your decision. It is not an approval, and it does not say the change is safe to merge.

Why the wording is careful

GitHub's own AI review does not look at dependency files such as package.json or Gemfile.lock, so a bump can pass with no review at all. A clean verdict here only means no issue was found in the listed checks.

• Never "safe"
• Always a not-examined list