litellm

The litellm codebase assessment reveals a compliance score of 78/100 across 52 evaluated routes, indicating moderate adherence to documented specifications and security standards. While approximately 660 claims passed verification, the assessment identified 185 bugs requiring attention, including 30 critical and 66 high-severity issues. This score suggests the codebase is functional but carries meaningful technical debt and documentation gaps that could impact operational reliability, security posture, and developer productivity. The relatively high number of critical findings warrants prioritized remediation to reduce business risk. The most significant concerns center on authentication and authorization mechanisms, which show inconsistencies between documented behavior and actual implementation. Critical findings indicate that several routes including audio/speech, completions, and image generation endpoints have authentication implementations that may not align with intended access controls or documented specifications. Additionally, several components reference missing files in the codebase, suggesting either documentation drift or incomplete deployments that could lead to runtime failures in production. The authentication domain specifically shows only 57% compliance, representing a material security risk that could enable unauthorized access or privilege escalation if exploited. Domain coverage analysis reveals uneven compliance across functional areas. Health monitoring endpoints demonstrate strong compliance at 83%, while core LLM API routes (15 routes) and administrative functions (29 routes) both show approximately 79-81% compliance, indicating reasonable but imperfect alignment. The authentication domain's 57% compliance rate is concerning given its foundational role in system security. Most critically, the single public-facing route shows 0% compliance, suggesting this endpoint may be operating entirely outside documented specifications and represents an unknown risk surface for public exposure. Immediate action should focus on three priorities: First, conduct a focused security review of all authentication and authorization flows, particularly the 30 critical bugs, to ensure access controls function as intended and prevent unauthorized access. Second, reconcile documentation against actual implementation to eliminate the ambiguity that drives low compliance scores, which will reduce operational risk and accelerate developer onboarding. Third, establish automated compliance testing in the CI/CD pipeline to prevent regression and maintain compliance scores above 85% going forward. These investments will materially reduce security risk, improve system reliability, and decrease the cost of future feature development.