eslint-plugin-traceability 1.0.1 → 1.0.3

package/.voder/implementation-progress.md

@@ -1,145 +1,146 @@
 # Implementation Progress Assessment
 
-**Generated:** 2025-11-16T22:13:27.920Z
+**Generated:** 2025-11-16T22:52:12.274Z
 
 ![Progress Chart](./progress-chart.png)
 
-Projection: flat (no recent upward trend)
+Projected completion (from current rate): cycle 41.2
 
-## IMPLEMENTATION STATUS: INCOMPLETE (89.6% ± 10% COMPLETE)
+## IMPLEMENTATION STATUS: INCOMPLETE (91% ± 10% COMPLETE)
 
 ## OVERALL ASSESSMENT
-Documentation and version control are below the required thresholds, deferring functionality assessment until these support areas are addressed.
+Overall status is INCOMPLETE due to Testing (87%) and Version Control (85%) scores below the required 90% threshold, and an unassessed Functionality area. All other areas meet or exceed expectations.
 
 ## NEXT PRIORITY
-Improve user documentation to include API reference and examples; consolidate CI and deploy workflows into a single unified pipeline with smoke tests.
+Improve testing to at least 90% (consistent JSDoc structure, GIVEN-WHEN-THEN clarity) and elevate version control to 90% by aligning hooks and adding post-deployment verification, then reassess functionality.
 
 
 
-## CODE_QUALITY ASSESSMENT (90% ± 16% COMPLETE)
-- The codebase exhibits high code quality: all linting, formatting, type-checking, duplication and complexity checks pass; no disabled rules or suppressions; robust test coverage; and well-configured CI and pre-commit hooks.
-- Linting (ESLint) passes with no errors under the configured rules, including default complexity (max 20).
-- Formatting (Prettier) passes with all files compliant.
-- Type checking (TypeScript) passes with zero errors.
-- Duplication check (jscpd) reports 0% duplication across src and tests.
-- Test coverage is 96%+ across statements, branches, functions, and lines—exceeding coverage thresholds.
-- No @ts-nocheck, eslint-disable or inline suppressions found in production code.
-- Cyclomatic complexity enforced at default (20) with no violations.
-- Max-lines-per-function (90) and max-lines-per-file (400) enforced and under limits.
-- Pre-commit and pre-push hooks run format, lint, type-check, duplication, tests, and audit checks.
-- CI workflow runs build, type-check, lint, duplication, tests, format, audit, and integration tests.
+## CODE_QUALITY ASSESSMENT (93% ± 17% COMPLETE)
+- The codebase exhibits strong quality: linting, formatting, type‐checking, tests, duplication and complexity checks all pass with no errors. Quality tools are properly configured and enforced both locally and in CI, and there are no disabled checks or technical‐debt suppressions. Function and file sizes remain within configured limits, and traceability annotations are consistently applied.
+- ESLint flat config applied with complexity and max‐lines rules, and no lint errors or warnings.
+- Prettier formatting passes on all files (format:check reports 0 issues).
+- TypeScript type‐checking (tsc --noEmit) completes with no errors.
+- Jest tests pass (100+ tests) with coverage ≥96% across statements, branches, functions, and lines.
+- jscpd duplication scan reports 0 clones (0% duplication).
+- No @ts-ignore or eslint-disable suppressions found in src.
+- Cyclomatic complexity rule enforced at default threshold (20) with no violations.
+- File length (<400 lines) and function length (<90 lines) rules enforced with no breaches.
+- CI/CD pipeline integrates build, lint, type‐check, duplication, test, format, audit, and publish steps in a single workflow.
+- Traceability plugin tests and basic integration CLI script exercise core functionality.
 
 **Next Steps:**
-- Apply an incremental ratcheting plan on max-lines-per-function: lower the threshold (e.g., 90→80), fix violations, update ESLint config, and repeat until reaching a stricter target (e.g., 50).
-- Introduce periodic complexity audits (e.g., ESLint complexity: ['error',{max:15}]) to prevent future drift.
-- Review and lower max-lines (per file) threshold incrementally (400→300→200).
-- Add CI enforcement of new thresholds and include complexity metrics in PR checks for early feedback.
-
-## TESTING ASSESSMENT (90% ± 18% COMPLETE)
-- The project has a solid Jest-based test suite with 100% passing tests, non-interactive execution, strong coverage (96%+), and full story/requirement traceability. Tests are well-named, isolated, and use temporary directories for file I/O. A minor issue: one maintenance test suite does not clean up all temp directories, leading to resource leaks.
-- All tests run under Jest with `--ci --bail --coverage` and complete non-interactively, satisfying framework requirements.
-- Coverage thresholds are defined in jest.config.js and met comfortably (overall statements 96.72%, branches 85.6%, functions 100%, lines 96.72%).
-- Tests use os.tmpdir() and mkdtempSync for file operations, never modify the repository; cleanup is implemented in most suites.
-- Every test file has a JSDoc header with `@story` and `@req` annotations, and describe blocks reference specific stories, ensuring traceability.
-- Test file names accurately reflect the features under test (e.g. require-story-annotation.test.ts), with no misleading coverage terminology.
-- Tests are independent, fast, deterministic, and focus on observable behavior without complex test logic or loops.
-- Integration tests invoke the ESLint CLI via spawnSync to validate plugin rules, following best practices for E2E verification.
-- Minor gap: the `detectStaleAnnotations` nested-directory test does not remove its temporary directory after running, leaving orphaned files in os.tmpdir().
+- Evaluate lowering max‐lines‐per‐function threshold (e.g. toward 50) and plan incremental ratcheting to enforce more granular functions.
+- Introduce a complexity ratcheting plan if more stringent cyclomatic limits are desired (e.g. gradual reduction toward 15).
+- Add automated reporting/metrics to track average function size and complexity over time.
+- Consider integrating vulnerability scanning (e.g. Snyk) alongside npm audit in CI.
+- Periodically review and update dependency versions to address deprecation and security warnings.
+
+## TESTING ASSESSMENT (87% ± 15% COMPLETE)
+- The project has a mature testing setup using Jest, with 100% passing tests, non-interactive execution, proper use of temporary directories, and solid coverage that exceeds thresholds. Tests are well-named, isolated, and largely traceable to stories and requirements. Minor issues include inconsistent JSDoc headers in some rule tests, small bits of logic in tests, and lacking explicit GIVEN-WHEN-THEN structure.
+- All tests pass in non-interactive mode with jest --ci --bail --coverage
+- Jest is an established framework; test configuration in jest.config.js is correct
+- Global coverage (96.7% statements, 85.6% branches) exceeds configured thresholds
+- Maintenance tests use os.tmpdir() and clean up temp dirs; no repository files are modified
+- Tests include @story and @req annotations for traceability; most files use JSDoc headers
+- Test file names accurately describe their content and avoid coverage terminology
+- Integration tests invoke ESLint CLI correctly and assert exit codes and outputs
+- Minor logic appears in tests (array sorting, flatMap); could be simplified
+- Rule tests use line comments for @story/@req instead of JSDoc block headers
+- Tests don’t follow explicit GIVEN-WHEN-THEN separators but are structured with describe/it
 
 **Next Steps:**
-- Add cleanup (e.g. an `afterAll` or `finally` block) to the nested-directory test in detect-isolated.test.ts to remove its temporary directory.
-- Consider adding cleanup for any other maintenance test suites that create temp resources but do not remove them.
-- Expand maintenance tests to cover additional edge cases (e.g. updateAnnotationReferences permission errors).
-- Review test data builders or fixtures to centralize common patterns and reduce duplication across maintenance tests.
-
-## EXECUTION ASSESSMENT (95% ± 17% COMPLETE)
-- The ESLint plugin exhibits excellent execution: the build, type‐checking, linting, unit tests, integration tests, duplication checks, and CI pipeline all pass without errors, and core runtime behaviors are validated via CLI integration tests. No runtime failures or silent errors were observed.
-- Build (`npm run build`) completes successfully
-- Type checking (`tsc --noEmit`) passes with no errors
-- Linting (`npm run lint --max-warnings=0`) reports zero warnings
-- Unit tests (`jest --ci`) pass with 96% statement and 85% branch coverage
-- CLI integration tests (cli-integration.js and Jest) execute and exit with expected statuses
-- Duplication check (`jscpd`) finds 0 clones
-- CI workflows run quality checks and integration tests across Node 18.x and 20.x without failures
+- Convert rule test headers to JSDoc block comments with @story/@req to match traceability standard
+- Remove or minimize custom logic in tests (flatMap, sort) or replace with explicit expected arrays
+- Adopt GIVEN-WHEN-THEN or ARRANGE-ACT-ASSERT comments or naming to improve clarity
+- Add any missing edge case tests for uncovered lines in maintenance batch and update utils
+- Monitor unit test execution times to ensure they remain fast (<100ms each)
+
+## EXECUTION ASSESSMENT (95% ± 14% COMPLETE)
+- The project demonstrates a solid execution setup: build, type‐checking, linting, formatting, duplication scans, unit and integration tests (including CLI/E2E tests) all pass and are enforced in CI. The ESLint plugin runs correctly and behaves as expected in its target environment.
+- Build process (`npm run build`) completes without errors
+- Type-checking (`npm run type-check`), linting (`npm run lint --max-warnings=0`), formatting (`npm run format:check`), and duplication checks all pass
+- Unit tests achieve >96% coverage and all tests (including E2E/CLI integration tests) pass
+- CI/CD workflow runs quality checks on push to main and automatically publishes on successful completion
+- No critical runtime errors, silent failures or code duplication detected
 
 **Next Steps:**
-- Improve branch coverage in maintenance modules (e.g., batch.ts, update.ts) by adding edge-case tests
-- Add lightweight performance/benchmark tests to validate plugin behavior on large codebases
-- Monitor and optimize CI build/test durations (e.g., enable caching for TypeScript builds if needed)
-
-## DOCUMENTATION ASSESSMENT (82% ± 12% COMPLETE)
-- User-facing documentation covers installation, usage, rules, and configuration with proper attribution and up-to-date changelog, but lacks a consolidated API reference, richer runnable examples, and a structured user-docs directory for guides.
-- README.md includes the required “Created autonomously by voder.ai” attribution linking to https://voder.ai
-- CHANGELOG.md exists and reflects version 1.0.0
-- Installation and usage instructions in README align with package.json scripts and file structure
-- docs/rules contains detailed docs for each implemented rule
-- docs/config-presets.md and docs/eslint-9-setup-guide.md accurately describe plugin configuration
-- docs/cli-integration.md documents the integration script and references existing story files
-- No dedicated user-docs/ directory or consolidated API reference for the plugin’s exported interface
-- Usage examples in README are minimal snippets without full end-to-end scenarios
-- No troubleshooting or migration guide provided for users
+- Add a post-publish smoke test to install and verify the published npm package
+- Introduce lightweight performance benchmarks to measure plugin runtime impact
+- Consider automating a sample-project integration test to validate real-world usage
+
+## DOCUMENTATION ASSESSMENT (85% ± 16% COMPLETE)
+- The project’s user-facing documentation is well organized, up-to-date, and includes the required attribution, installation instructions, usage examples, API reference, and changelog.  A minor inconsistency between the set of rules listed in the README vs. the full API reference and the placement of configuration docs outside of the user-docs folder prevent a perfect score.
+- README.md includes an “Attribution” section with “Created autonomously by voder.ai” linking to https://voder.ai (meets the absolute requirement).
+- README installation and usage instructions are clear and accurate.  It links to the ESLint v9 setup guide (docs/eslint-9-setup-guide.md) which exists.
+- README provides a Quick Start and points to user-docs/api-reference.md and user-docs/examples.md which both contain runnable examples and complete API listings.
+- CHANGELOG.md is present, current, and documents recent changes (1.0.1 and 1.0.0).
+- user-docs/api-reference.md and user-docs/examples.md both begin with the required attribution and cover the plugin’s functionality and usage.
+- Minor inconsistency: README ‘Available Rules’ section lists only the three core annotation rules, while the API reference enumerates six rules (valid-annotation-format, valid-story-reference, valid-req-reference are omitted from the README’s rule list).
+- Configuration presets documentation lives under docs/config-presets.md (outside user-docs), so user-facing config docs are split between folders.
 
 **Next Steps:**
-- Create a user-docs/ directory and add a comprehensive API reference detailing exported `rules` and `configs`
-- Augment documentation with full, runnable examples demonstrating real-world ESLint config and linting scenarios
-- Add a troubleshooting or FAQ section to address common setup issues
-- Provide a migration guide in CHANGELOG.md or user-docs for future breaking changes
-
-## DEPENDENCIES ASSESSMENT (100% ± 18% COMPLETE)
-- All actively used dependencies are up to date with mature versions, the lockfile is committed, installation succeeds without deprecation warnings or vulnerabilities, and no conflicts or outdated packages were found.
-- npx dry-aged-deps reported: “All dependencies are up to date.”
-- package-lock.json is present and committed to git (verified via `git ls-files package-lock.json`).
-- npm install completes cleanly with no `npm WARN deprecated` messages.
-- npm audit shows 0 vulnerabilities at audit level low.
-- Dependency tree for key packages (eslint, js-yaml) is clean and consistent, with overrides applied as intended.
+- Update README.md ‘Available Rules’ section to list all six rules or clearly link to the full API reference.
+- Move or duplicate configuration presets documentation into user-docs/ (e.g. user-docs/configuration.md) so all end-user docs are collocated.
+- Consider adding a brief migration guide or troubleshooting section under user-docs to aid users upgrading between versions.
+- Periodically verify that user-facing docs (in README.md and user-docs/) remain synchronized with actual implemented rules in the plugin.
+
+## DEPENDENCIES ASSESSMENT (100% ± 17% COMPLETE)
+- All dependencies are current, lockfile is committed, installation is clean, and there are no deprecation or security warnings.
+- `npx dry-aged-deps` reports all dependencies are up to date.
+- package-lock.json is present and tracked in git.
+- `npm install` completed with no deprecation warnings.
+- `npm audit` reports zero vulnerabilities.
+- Peer dependency `eslint@^9.0.0` is satisfied by installed eslint@9.39.1.
 
 **Next Steps:**
-- Continue to rerun `npx dry-aged-deps` periodically to catch new mature version recommendations.
-- Monitor for deprecation or security warnings in your CI pipeline (e.g., as part of `npm install` hooks).
-- Ensure lockfile is updated and recommitted if any dependency changes occur in the future.
-- Consider setting up an automated scheduled job to run dependency checks and report any required actions.
-
-## SECURITY ASSESSMENT (95% ± 18% COMPLETE)
-- No active moderate-or-higher vulnerabilities found; secrets management and CI/CD security auditing are correctly implemented, with no conflicting automation.
-- npm audit reports zero vulnerabilities (info/low/moderate/high/critical = 0)
-- docs/security-incidents contains only a summary file, and no unresolved GHSA vulnerabilities remain
-- .env file exists locally, is listed in .gitignore, never tracked in Git, and .env.example provides safe defaults
-- No hardcoded secrets or API keys found in the source
-- CI workflow runs `npm audit --audit-level=high`, plus build, test, lint, type-check, and duplication checks
-- No Dependabot, Renovate, or other automated dependency update configurations detected
+- Continue to run `npx dry-aged-deps` regularly to catch new safe upgrade candidates.
+- Monitor for deprecation warnings on new dependency additions.
+- Keep using the committed lockfile to ensure reproducible installs.
+- Review dependencies periodically in your CI pipeline to detect emerging issues.
+
+## SECURITY ASSESSMENT (95% ± 15% COMPLETE)
+- The project demonstrates a strong security posture: no active vulnerabilities, proper secret management, secure CI/CD pipeline, and no conflicting automation. A minor adjustment to audit thresholds would further strengthen compliance.
+- npm audit reports zero vulnerabilities across all severity levels
+- Override for js-yaml (>=4.1.1) ensures prototype-pollution fix remains in place
+- .env is untracked (git ls-files empty), listed in .gitignore, never in history, and .env.example contains only placeholders
+- No hard-coded API keys, tokens, or credentials found in source code
+- No Dependabot, Renovate, or other automated update tools detected—manual dependency management only
+- CI/CD workflow runs quality gates and `npm audit --audit-level=high` in one pipeline and auto-publishes on push to main without manual approval
 
 **Next Steps:**
-- Consider adjusting the audit step to fail on moderate severity as well (`npm audit --audit-level=moderate`) to catch all issues early
-- Add scheduled periodic dependency vulnerability scans (e.g., GitHub Actions scheduled job) to monitor new disclosures
-- Enhance CI by integrating a secrets-scanner (e.g., GitHub secret-scanning or TruffleHog) to detect accidental leaks in future commits
-- Document the js-yaml patch in a proper SECURITY-INCIDENT-YYYY-MM-DD-js-yaml.resolved.md file for audit traceability
-
-## VERSION_CONTROL ASSESSMENT (75% ± 18% COMPLETE)
-- Overall the repository has strong version control practices with modern GitHub Actions, robust pre-commit/pre-push hooks, clean .gitignore, and automatic npm publishing. However, it uses separate CI and deploy workflows (duplicating tests) instead of a single unified pipeline, and lacks post-deployment smoke tests or package verification.
-- CI uses actions/checkout@v4 and setup-node@v4—no deprecated actions detected
-- Two workflows (ci.yml + deploy.yml) split quality gates and deployment, duplicating build/test steps
-- deploy.yml re-runs build, lint, tests before publishing—anti-pattern versus a single unified workflow
-- Automatic npm publish on push to main is correctly configured (secrets-driven, no manual gate)
-- No post-deployment verification or smoke tests to validate the published package
-- .prettierignore and .gitignore correctly ignore build outputs; .husky and .voder aren’t ignored
-- Pre-commit hook runs formatting and lint; pre-push hook runs build, type-check, lint, duplication check, tests, audit, integration tests—parity with CI
-- Working directory is clean, on main branch, and all commits appear pushed
+- Update CI audit step to `npm audit --audit-level=moderate` to catch moderate-severity issues per policy
+- Establish a weekly automated scan or dashboard to monitor new vulnerabilities
+- Document any accepted residual risks within 14 days using the formal security-incident template
+
+## VERSION_CONTROL ASSESSMENT (85% ± 17% COMPLETE)
+- Version control and CI/CD are well-configured with trunk-based development, modern hooks, and automated publishing. There is a minor hooks-to-pipeline parity gap and no post-deployment verification.
+- Working directory is clean (only .voder changes) and on main branch
+- .voder/ is not in .gitignore and is being tracked
+- Single unified GitHub Actions workflow runs quality gates and an automated npm publish on every push to main
+- Actions/checkout@v4 and actions/setup-node@v4 are used—no deprecated actions or syntax detected
+- Comprehensive quality checks in CI: build, type-check, lint, duplication, tests, format check, security audit
+- Husky v9 directory-based hooks present: pre-commit runs format+lint; pre-push runs build, type-check, lint, duplication, tests, format-check, audit, and cli integration
+- Pre-commit hook meets requirements (formatting + lint); pre-push hook covers comprehensive checks
+- Pipeline does not run the cli-integration.js step that pre-push hook runs (hook/pipeline parity discrepancy)
+- No post-deployment or post-publish smoke tests or verification steps in CI/CD (medium-severity)
 
 **Next Steps:**
-- Consolidate quality checks and publish steps into a single GitHub Actions workflow to avoid duplicated testing
-- Remove or refactor deploy.yml to eliminate duplicate build/test steps or add a dependency on the CI job
-- Implement post-deployment/package smoke tests (e.g. install the published npm package and run basic validation)
-- Optionally remove the develop branch trigger to enforce trunk-based development on main only
-- Add health check or automated verification jobs after publishing to catch release issues early
+- Add a post-deployment smoke test or package validation step in the CI/CD workflow
+- Incorporate the cli-integration.js script into the GitHub Actions ‘quality-checks’ job to match the pre-push hook
+- Optionally collapse build steps to avoid duplication between quality-checks and publish jobs
+- Implement post-publish health checks or automated validation of the published npm package
 
 ## FUNCTIONALITY ASSESSMENT (undefined% ± 95% COMPLETE)
-- Functionality assessment skipped - fix 2 deficient support area(s) first
+- Functionality assessment skipped - fix 3 deficient support area(s) first
 - Support areas must meet thresholds before assessing feature completion
-- Deficient areas: DOCUMENTATION (82%), VERSION_CONTROL (75%)
+- Deficient areas: TESTING (87%), DOCUMENTATION (85%), VERSION_CONTROL (85%)
 - Principle: "Improvement of daily work is higher priority than daily work" - fix foundation before building features
 
 **Next Steps:**
-- DOCUMENTATION: Create a user-docs/ directory and add a comprehensive API reference detailing exported `rules` and `configs`
-- DOCUMENTATION: Augment documentation with full, runnable examples demonstrating real-world ESLint config and linting scenarios
-- VERSION_CONTROL: Consolidate quality checks and publish steps into a single GitHub Actions workflow to avoid duplicated testing
-- VERSION_CONTROL: Remove or refactor deploy.yml to eliminate duplicate build/test steps or add a dependency on the CI job
+- TESTING: Convert rule test headers to JSDoc block comments with @story/@req to match traceability standard
+- TESTING: Remove or minimize custom logic in tests (flatMap, sort) or replace with explicit expected arrays
+- DOCUMENTATION: Update README.md ‘Available Rules’ section to list all six rules or clearly link to the full API reference.
+- DOCUMENTATION: Move or duplicate configuration presets documentation into user-docs/ (e.g. user-docs/configuration.md) so all end-user docs are collocated.
+- VERSION_CONTROL: Add a post-deployment smoke test or package validation step in the CI/CD workflow
+- VERSION_CONTROL: Incorporate the cli-integration.js script into the GitHub Actions ‘quality-checks’ job to match the pre-push hook