I'm extemely skeptical about automated code quality scoring tools. Most of them focus on superficial metrics and completely miss the important stuff.
One of the most important metrics for project quality is how easy it is to implement new features. Good code is easy to extend and build on top. Developers who haven't worked on the project before should be able to easily jump in and start contributing good PRs. I don't think that this kind of scoring is something that can be automated... At least not for a long time.
Actually this is somewhat already done in a quite clever way by the product CodeScene by Empear (https://empear.com/). This tool looks at the history of files in a repo and detects a lot of things such as:
* Correlation between files (we always seem to change b.cs when we change a.cs)
* We have lost knowledge in the team, file a.cs was 85% created by developer X who has now quit.
* A certain file is often modified (indicating too many responsibilities, and thus "bad code").
