fix(scan): add query references to check results to enable check-to-query linking in get_scan_results()

[hirenkumar-n-dholariya]

Problem

scan.get_scan_results() returns checks[] and queries[] with no way to link them together. Users storing results in a relational database cannot determine which SQL was executed for a specific check.

Root Cause

Check.get_dict() never included query information in its output, even though the Check class already tracks related queries internally via _get_all_related_queries().

Fix

Add a "queries" field to get_dict() output: "queries": [query.query_name for query in self._get_all_related_queries()]

This exposes the query names so users can cross-reference: check["queries"] -> matches queries[]["name"]

Result

Users can now link checks to their SQL queries:

results = scan.get_scan_results()
query_map = {q["name"]: q for q in results["queries"]}

for check in results["checks"]:
for query_name in check.get("queries", []):
sql = query_map[query_name]["sql"]

Impact

• No breaking change — adds a new field, removes nothing
• Works for all check types via existing _get_all_related_queries()

References

• Fixes How to link Checks to their SQL Queries in scan results? #2475

[sonarqubecloud]

Quality Gate passed

Issues
0 New issues
0 Accepted issues

Measures
0 Security Hotspots
0.0% Coverage on New Code
0.0% Duplication on New Code

See analysis details on SonarQube Cloud

[hirenkumar-n-dholariya]

Hi @Niels-b @bmarinovic @tomassatka

I have submitted this fix for issue #2475 where get_scan_results() returns checks[] and queries[] with no way to link them together.

The fix adds a "queries" field to Check.get_dict() output using the already existing _get_all_related_queries() method, so users can cross-reference checks with their SQL queries like:

check["queries"] -> matches queries[]["name"]

No breaking change - adds a new field only. Could someone please review when you get a chance? Happy to make any
changes based on feedback. Thank you!

[hirenkumar-n-dholariya]

Hi @bmarinovic @Niels-b

I hope you're doing well! I wanted to gently follow up on this PR which addresses the check-to-query linking request in issue #2475.

The fix is a single line addition to Check.get_dict() using the already existing _get_all_related_queries() method - no breaking
changes at all.

I completely understand you have a lot on your plate; whenever you get a moment, your quick review comment/approval on the approach would be greatly appreciated!

Sincerely appreciate your time and approval on this PR.

[hirenkumar-n-dholariya]

Hi @bmarinovic @tomassatka @Niels-b
Hope you are doing well!

Could you please review PR #2658 and give your approval/feedback to proceed.