msd-core/tests/probe-core.test.cjs

/**
 * probe-core reference-model unit tests (ADR-550 Decision 7).
 *
 * probe-core is the GENERIC spec-phase probe resolution model extracted from the
 * edge-probe (the first adapter): the resolution lifecycle, the two-axis
 * status×verification re-cut, `validateResolution`/`validateRequirement`, the
 * `analyzeCoverage(items, resolutions?, validators)` merge/rollup/orphan-reject
 * engine, the `byVerification` rollup, and the `runProbeCli` I/O scaffold.
 *
 * Asserts the LOCKED export surface against the BUILT artifact
 * (`gsd-core/bin/lib/probe-core.cjs`), which `npm run build:lib` (run by pretest /
 * the run-tests sentinel) emits from `src/probe-core.cts`.
 *
 * The injected runtime validators are the enforcement contract (ADR-550 #5): the
 * CLI runs over JSON where TS types are erased, so `analyzeCoverage` is told its
 * probe's closed vocabularies — `{ categories, verification, requiredFieldsByVerification }`
 * — rather than relying on the type system. These tests pin the validators' behavior.
 */
'use strict';
process.env.GSD_TEST_MODE = '1';

const { test, describe } = require('node:test');
const assert = require('node:assert/strict');
const path = require('node:path');

const BUILT_SCRIPT = path.join(__dirname, '..', 'gsd-core', 'bin', 'lib', 'probe-core.cjs');
const pc = require(BUILT_SCRIPT);

// A representative validators bundle — the shape the edge adapter injects, used here
// to exercise the generic engine independent of any one probe.
const VALIDATORS = {
  categories: ['adjacency', 'empty', 'ordering'],
  verification: ['explicit', 'backstop'],
  requiredFieldsByVerification: { explicit: ['resolution'], backstop: ['resolution'] },
};

function item(category, overrides = {}) {
  return {
    requirement_id: 'R1',
    category,
    status: 'unresolved',
    verification: null,
    resolution: null,
    reason: null,
    probe: `probe-for-${category}`,
    ...overrides,
  };
}

const UNRESOLVED_ITEMS = [item('adjacency'), item('empty'), item('ordering')];

describe('probe-core: VALID_STATUS is the re-cut lifecycle enum', () => {
  test('exposes exactly resolved | dismissed | unresolved (no covered/backstop)', () => {
    assert.deepEqual([...ep_sorted(pc.VALID_STATUS)], ['dismissed', 'resolved', 'unresolved']);
    assert.ok(!pc.VALID_STATUS.includes('covered'), 'covered must not survive the re-cut as a status');
    assert.ok(!pc.VALID_STATUS.includes('backstop'), 'backstop must not survive the re-cut as a status');
  });
});

function ep_sorted(arr) {
  return [...arr].sort();
}

describe('probe-core: validateResolution (status×verification)', () => {
  const v = (r) => pc.validateResolution(r, VALIDATORS);
  test('rejects an unknown status', () => {
    assert.throws(() => v({ requirement_id: 'R1', category: 'adjacency', status: 'maybe' }), /invalid status/i);
  });
  test('rejects a former covered status (re-cut: no longer a valid status)', () => {
    assert.throws(() => v({ requirement_id: 'R1', category: 'adjacency', status: 'covered', resolution: 'x' }), /invalid status/i);
  });
  test('rejects dismissed without a reason', () => {
    assert.throws(() => v({ requirement_id: 'R1', category: 'adjacency', status: 'dismissed', reason: '' }), /dismissed requires a reason/i);
  });
  test('accepts dismissed with a reason', () => {
    assert.equal(v({ requirement_id: 'R1', category: 'adjacency', status: 'dismissed', reason: 'bounded enum' }), true);
  });
  test('rejects resolved with a missing verification tier', () => {
    assert.throws(() => v({ requirement_id: 'R1', category: 'adjacency', status: 'resolved', resolution: 'AC' }), /verification/i);
  });
  test('rejects resolved with an unknown verification tier', () => {
    assert.throws(() => v({ requirement_id: 'R1', category: 'adjacency', status: 'resolved', verification: 'judgment', resolution: 'AC' }), /invalid verification/i);
  });
  test('rejects resolved/explicit with empty resolution text', () => {
    assert.throws(() => v({ requirement_id: 'R1', category: 'adjacency', status: 'resolved', verification: 'explicit', resolution: '   ' }), /explicit requires a resolution/i);
  });
  test('rejects resolved/backstop with missing resolution note', () => {
    assert.throws(() => v({ requirement_id: 'R1', category: 'adjacency', status: 'resolved', verification: 'backstop' }), /backstop requires a resolution/i);
  });
  test('accepts resolved/explicit with a resolution', () => {
    assert.equal(v({ requirement_id: 'R1', category: 'adjacency', status: 'resolved', verification: 'explicit', resolution: 'AC#6' }), true);
  });
  test('accepts resolved/backstop with a resolution note', () => {
    assert.equal(v({ requirement_id: 'R1', category: 'adjacency', status: 'resolved', verification: 'backstop', resolution: 'held-out PBT suite' }), true);
  });
  // Re-review #5 Medium — fail closed across the FULL status×verification model, not just
  // `resolved`. The invariant (probe-core header): verification is null unless status is
  // resolved. A dismissed/unresolved resolution carrying a tier otherwise merges verbatim
  // (analyzeCoverage line ~189), breaking the model for the second adapter (#644) that
  // inherits this seam.
  test('rejects a dismissed resolution carrying a verification tier (null unless resolved)', () => {
    assert.throws(() => v({ requirement_id: 'R1', category: 'adjacency', status: 'dismissed', reason: 'n/a', verification: 'explicit' }), /verification must be null/i);
  });
  test('rejects an unresolved resolution carrying a verification tier', () => {
    assert.throws(() => v({ requirement_id: 'R1', category: 'adjacency', status: 'unresolved', verification: 'backstop' }), /verification must be null/i);
  });
  // An unresolved resolution is an UNACTED item — a populated resolution/reason payload is an
  // authoring mistake (the author meant resolved/dismissed) that today is silently dropped into
  // the unresolved count with no error pointing at it. Reject the payload.
  test('rejects an unresolved resolution carrying a resolution payload', () => {
    assert.throws(() => v({ requirement_id: 'R1', category: 'adjacency', status: 'unresolved', resolution: 'AC#1' }), /unresolved must not carry/i);
  });
  test('rejects an unresolved resolution carrying a reason payload', () => {
    assert.throws(() => v({ requirement_id: 'R1', category: 'adjacency', status: 'unresolved', reason: 'because' }), /unresolved must not carry/i);
  });
  test('accepts a bare unresolved resolution (no payload — a harmless no-op merge)', () => {
    assert.equal(v({ requirement_id: 'R1', category: 'adjacency', status: 'unresolved' }), true);
  });
});

describe('probe-core: validateRequirement (generic id/text only)', () => {
  test('rejects a missing id', () => {
    assert.throws(() => pc.validateRequirement({ text: 'x' }), /requirement id must be a non-empty string/i);
  });
  test('rejects an empty id', () => {
    assert.throws(() => pc.validateRequirement({ id: '   ', text: 'x' }), /requirement id must be a non-empty string/i);
  });
  test('rejects a non-string text', () => {
    assert.throws(() => pc.validateRequirement({ id: 'R1', text: 42 }), /text must be a string/i);
  });
  test('accepts a valid requirement', () => {
    assert.doesNotThrow(() => pc.validateRequirement({ id: 'R1', text: 'a testable statement' }));
  });
});

describe('probe-core: analyzeCoverage (merge · rollup · byVerification)', () => {
  test('no resolutions → every item unresolved; resolved 0; byVerification zeroed per tier', () => {
    const rep = pc.analyzeCoverage(UNRESOLVED_ITEMS, [], VALIDATORS);
    assert.deepEqual(rep.coverage, {
      applicable: 3, resolved: 0, unresolved: 3, byVerification: { explicit: 0, backstop: 0 },
    });
  });
  test('merges a resolved/explicit resolution and counts byVerification.explicit', () => {
    const rep = pc.analyzeCoverage(UNRESOLVED_ITEMS, [
      { requirement_id: 'R1', category: 'adjacency', status: 'resolved', verification: 'explicit', resolution: 'AC#6: touching intervals merge' },
    ], VALIDATORS);
    const adj = rep.items.find((i) => i.category === 'adjacency');
    assert.equal(adj.status, 'resolved');
    assert.equal(adj.verification, 'explicit');
    assert.equal(adj.resolution, 'AC#6: touching intervals merge');
    assert.equal(rep.coverage.resolved, 1);
    assert.equal(rep.coverage.unresolved, 2);
    assert.deepEqual(rep.coverage.byVerification, { explicit: 1, backstop: 0 });
  });
  test('a dismissed item counts toward coverage.resolved (closed set) but NOT byVerification', () => {
    // coverage.resolved preserves the pre-re-cut "closed" semantic = applicable - unresolved
    // (covered + dismissed + backstop), per edge-probe.md and the migration contract.
    const rep = pc.analyzeCoverage(UNRESOLVED_ITEMS, [
      { requirement_id: 'R1', category: 'ordering', status: 'dismissed', reason: 'canonically sorted; no tie' },
    ], VALIDATORS);
    assert.equal(rep.coverage.resolved, 1);
    assert.equal(rep.coverage.unresolved, 2);
    assert.deepEqual(rep.coverage.byVerification, { explicit: 0, backstop: 0 });
    const ord = rep.items.find((i) => i.category === 'ordering');
    assert.equal(ord.status, 'dismissed');
    assert.equal(ord.verification, null);
    assert.equal(ord.reason, 'canonically sorted; no tie');
  });
  test('mixed resolved/explicit + backstop + dismissed: resolved = closed = applicable - unresolved', () => {
    const rep = pc.analyzeCoverage(UNRESOLVED_ITEMS, [
      { requirement_id: 'R1', category: 'adjacency', status: 'resolved', verification: 'explicit', resolution: 'AC#6' },
      { requirement_id: 'R1', category: 'empty', status: 'resolved', verification: 'backstop', resolution: 'held-out empty-input PBT' },
      { requirement_id: 'R1', category: 'ordering', status: 'dismissed', reason: 'canonically sorted' },
    ], VALIDATORS);
    assert.equal(rep.coverage.applicable, 3);
    assert.equal(rep.coverage.unresolved, 0);
    assert.equal(rep.coverage.resolved, 3); // 2 resolved-status + 1 dismissed
    assert.deepEqual(rep.coverage.byVerification, { explicit: 1, backstop: 1 });
  });
  test('an all-dismissed run is CLOSED but NOT affirmatively covered (byVerification is the honest gate)', () => {
    // Re-review #5 Medium — coverage.resolved is the closed set (resolved + dismissed), kept
    // count-preserved per the blessed migration contract. So an all-dismissed spec has
    // resolved === applicable while NOTHING was affirmatively resolved/backstopped. A CI gate
    // keying on `resolved === applicable` would read green here; the honest signal is
    // byVerification (all tiers zero). This test locks that distinction.
    const rep = pc.analyzeCoverage(UNRESOLVED_ITEMS, [
      { requirement_id: 'R1', category: 'adjacency', status: 'dismissed', reason: 'bounded enum' },
      { requirement_id: 'R1', category: 'empty', status: 'dismissed', reason: 'guaranteed non-empty' },
      { requirement_id: 'R1', category: 'ordering', status: 'dismissed', reason: 'canonically sorted' },
    ], VALIDATORS);
    assert.equal(rep.coverage.unresolved, 0);
    assert.equal(rep.coverage.resolved, 3); // closed set counts the dismissals
    assert.deepEqual(rep.coverage.byVerification, { explicit: 0, backstop: 0 }); // nothing affirmatively verified
  });
  test('rejects a duplicate (requirement_id, category) resolution', () => {
    assert.throws(() => pc.analyzeCoverage(UNRESOLVED_ITEMS, [
      { requirement_id: 'R1', category: 'adjacency', status: 'resolved', verification: 'explicit', resolution: 'AC#1' },
      { requirement_id: 'R1', category: 'adjacency', status: 'resolved', verification: 'explicit', resolution: 'AC#2' },
    ], VALIDATORS), /duplicate resolution/i);
  });
  test('rejects an orphan resolution (no matching proposed item)', () => {
    assert.throws(() => pc.analyzeCoverage(UNRESOLVED_ITEMS, [
      { requirement_id: 'R1', category: 'boundary', status: 'resolved', verification: 'explicit', resolution: 'AC' },
    ], VALIDATORS), /unknown resolution|no matching proposed/i);
  });
  test('propagates an invalid-resolution throw from validateResolution', () => {
    assert.throws(() => pc.analyzeCoverage(UNRESOLVED_ITEMS, [
      { requirement_id: 'R1', category: 'empty', status: 'dismissed' },
    ], VALIDATORS), /dismissed requires a reason/i);
  });
  test('rejects items that is not an array', () => {
    assert.throws(() => pc.analyzeCoverage('nope', [], VALIDATORS), /items must be an array/i);
  });
  test('rejects a proposed item whose category is not in validators.categories', () => {
    // Adapter self-consistency: an item carrying a category outside the probe's closed
    // vocabulary is an adapter bug, caught here rather than silently rolled up.
    assert.throws(() => pc.analyzeCoverage([item('bogus-category')], [], VALIDATORS), /unknown category/i);
  });

  // m1: a verbatim item (no matching author resolution) is rolled up as-is, so its OWN
  // status/fields must also be validated. The edge adapter only proposes `unresolved` items, but
  // the prohibition adapter (#644) proposes LLM-generated items that arrive already populated —
  // an out-of-enum status or a `dismissed` with no reason must fail closed, not count as closed.
  test('m1: rejects a verbatim item carrying an out-of-enum status (e.g. the dropped "covered")', () => {
    assert.throws(
      () => pc.analyzeCoverage([item('adjacency', { status: 'covered' })], [], VALIDATORS),
      /invalid status/i,
    );
  });
  test('m1: rejects a verbatim item dismissed without a reason', () => {
    assert.throws(
      () => pc.analyzeCoverage([item('adjacency', { status: 'dismissed' })], [], VALIDATORS),
      /dismissed requires a reason/i,
    );
  });
  test('m1: rejects a verbatim resolved item missing its verification tier', () => {
    assert.throws(
      () => pc.analyzeCoverage([item('adjacency', { status: 'resolved', resolution: 'AC' })], [], VALIDATORS),
      /requires a verification tier/i,
    );
  });
  test('m1: a matching resolution still governs — item validation targets VERBATIM items only', () => {
    // When a resolution matches, the item is rebuilt from the (already-validated) resolution, so a
    // pre-populated item status is irrelevant and must NOT cause a throw. Guards against the m1
    // fix over-reaching into the merge path.
    const rep = pc.analyzeCoverage([item('adjacency', { status: 'covered' })], [
      { requirement_id: 'R1', category: 'adjacency', status: 'resolved', verification: 'explicit', resolution: 'AC#6' },
    ], VALIDATORS);
    const adj = rep.items.find((i) => i.category === 'adjacency');
    assert.equal(adj.status, 'resolved');
    assert.equal(adj.verification, 'explicit');
    assert.equal(rep.coverage.resolved, 1);
  });
});

describe('probe-core: runProbeCli (generic I/O scaffold, injected io)', () => {
  const report = { items: [], coverage: { applicable: 0, resolved: 0, unresolved: 0, byVerification: {} } };
  test('no requirements path → writes usage to stderr and exits 2', () => {
    let code; let err = '';
    pc.runProbeCli(() => report, {
      usage: 'demo-probe.cjs <requirements.json> [resolutions.json]',
      argv: ['node', 'demo'], writeErr: (s) => { err += s; }, exit: (c) => { code = c; },
    });
    assert.equal(code, 2);
    assert.match(err, /usage: demo-probe\.cjs/);
  });
  test('valid requirements path → calls analyze and prints the report as JSON', () => {
    let out = '';
    pc.runProbeCli((reqs, res) => {
      assert.deepEqual(reqs, [{ id: 'R1', text: 'x' }]);
      assert.deepEqual(res, []);
      return report;
    }, {
      usage: 'demo', argv: ['node', 'demo', '/fake/req.json'],
      readFile: () => '[{"id":"R1","text":"x"}]', write: (s) => { out += s; }, exit: () => {},
    });
    assert.deepEqual(JSON.parse(out), report);
  });
  test('reads the optional resolutions file when a second path is given', () => {
    let seenRes;
    pc.runProbeCli((reqs, res) => { seenRes = res; return report; }, {
      usage: 'demo', argv: ['node', 'demo', '/req.json', '/res.json'],
      readFile: (p) => (p === '/res.json' ? '[{"requirement_id":"R1"}]' : '[{"id":"R1"}]'),
      write: () => {}, exit: () => {},
    });
    assert.deepEqual(seenRes, [{ requirement_id: 'R1' }]);
  });
  test('invalid requirements JSON → exits 2 (handled, not an uncaught throw)', () => {
    let code;
    pc.runProbeCli(() => report, {
      usage: 'demo', argv: ['node', 'demo', '/req.json'],
      readFile: () => 'not json {{{', writeErr: () => {}, exit: (c) => { code = c; },
    });
    assert.equal(code, 2);
  });
  test('an analyze throw → exits 2 (the engine fail-closed surfaces, never silently passes)', () => {
    let code;
    pc.runProbeCli(() => { throw new Error('boom'); }, {
      usage: 'demo', argv: ['node', 'demo', '/req.json'],
      readFile: () => '[]', writeErr: () => {}, exit: (c) => { code = c; },
    });
    assert.equal(code, 2);
  });
  // Re-review #5 Low — the scaffold trusts each adapter's `as` cast for the returned report.
  // A future adapter (#644) that forgets to validate inside its closure would otherwise have a
  // structurally-broken report written as green output. Guard the report shape structurally.
  test('a structurally-invalid report from analyze → exits 2 and writes nothing (no silent malformed output)', () => {
    let code; let out = '';
    pc.runProbeCli(() => ({ nope: true }), {
      usage: 'demo', argv: ['node', 'demo', '/req.json'],
      readFile: () => '[]', write: (s) => { out += s; }, writeErr: () => {}, exit: (c) => { code = c; },
    });
    assert.equal(code, 2);
    assert.equal(out, '');
  });
  test('a report whose coverage object carries non-numeric counts → exits 2 (partial-guard case)', () => {
    // items[] is well-formed and `coverage` IS an object, so the cheaper checks pass — this
    // exercises the numeric-count branch of the structural guard specifically.
    let code; let out = '';
    pc.runProbeCli(() => ({ items: [], coverage: { applicable: 'x', resolved: null, unresolved: undefined, byVerification: {} } }), {
      usage: 'demo', argv: ['node', 'demo', '/req.json'],
      readFile: () => '[]', write: (s) => { out += s; }, writeErr: () => {}, exit: (c) => { code = c; },
    });
    assert.equal(code, 2);
    assert.equal(out, '');
  });
  test('a well-formed report still writes and does not trip the structural guard', () => {
    let out = '';
    pc.runProbeCli(() => report, {
      usage: 'demo', argv: ['node', 'demo', '/req.json'],
      readFile: () => '[]', write: (s) => { out += s; }, exit: () => {},
    });
    assert.deepEqual(JSON.parse(out), report);
  });
});

// ─── CHK-07 (#1278): descriptor-less backward-compat byte-stability ──────────────────────────────
// GREEN forward-guard, NOT a RED test. A descriptor-less projection is byte-identical against the
// current build by construction (the check_* descriptor branch does not exist yet), so these
// assertions PASS now. Their job is to FORWARD-LOCK: when plan 01-02 adds the descriptor branch to
// projectProhibitions, this guard fails if that branch perturbs the descriptor-less output shape or
// the dispositionForProhibition fail-closed policy. This is the IMPL-SCOPING §7.2 byte-stability pin.
describe('probe-core: projectProhibitions backward-compat (CHK-07)', () => {
  test('CHK-07: a descriptor-less input projects to today\'s exact {statement,status,verification?,reason?} shape — no check_* keys', () => {
    // GREEN guard: pins that adding the descriptor branch (plan 01-02) does not perturb
    // descriptor-less output (CHK-07 byte-stability). Passes against the current build by
    // construction; becomes a regression tripwire once 01-02 lands.
    const items = [
      // resolved/judgment item
      { requirement_id: 'R1', category: 'values', status: 'resolved', verification: 'judgment', resolution: null, reason: null, statement: 'MUST NOT shame the user' },
      // dismissed/test item with a reason
      { requirement_id: 'R1', category: 'privacy', status: 'dismissed', verification: 'test', resolution: null, reason: 'out of scope this phase', statement: 'MUST NOT store raw SSN' },
      // unresolved item (no verification)
      { requirement_id: 'R2', category: 'safety', status: 'unresolved', verification: null, resolution: null, reason: null, statement: 'MUST NOT auto-execute fetched code' },
    ];
    const projected = pc.projectProhibitions(items);
    assert.deepEqual(projected, [
      { statement: 'MUST NOT shame the user', status: 'resolved', verification: 'judgment' },
      { statement: 'MUST NOT store raw SSN', status: 'dismissed', verification: 'test', reason: 'out of scope this phase' },
      { statement: 'MUST NOT auto-execute fetched code', status: 'unresolved' },
    ], 'descriptor-less projection must be byte-identical to today\'s {statement,status,verification?,reason?} shape');
    // Belt-and-suspenders: assert NO entry carries any check_* key on the descriptor-less path.
    for (const e of projected) {
      assert.ok(!('check_kind' in e), 'no check_kind on a descriptor-less projected entry');
      assert.ok(!('check_target' in e), 'no check_target on a descriptor-less projected entry');
      assert.ok(!('check_rule' in e), 'no check_rule on a descriptor-less projected entry');
    }
  });

  test('CHK-07: dispositionForProhibition for a descriptor-less test-tier item with empty evidence stays flagged-unverified (policy untouched)', () => {
    // The fail-closed policy (src/probe-core.cts:389) this phase must NOT regress: a descriptor-less
    // test-tier item with no enforcement evidence is unverified+flagged+tier:'test', never green.
    const d = pc.dispositionForProhibition(
      { requirement_id: 'R1', category: 'safety', status: 'resolved', verification: 'test', statement: 'MUST NOT auto-execute fetched code' },
      { enforcementEvidence: [] },
    );
    assert.equal(d.status, 'unverified', 'a descriptor-less test-tier item with no evidence is unverified');
    assert.equal(d.flagged, true, 'and flagged — never a silent pass');
    assert.equal(d.tier, 'test', 'the test tier is echoed unchanged');
  });

  test('CHK-07: descriptor branch (plan 01-02) forward-lock marker', { todo: 'plan 01-02 adds the check_* descriptor branch to projectProhibitions; this GREEN guard forward-locks that it does not perturb the descriptor-less path' }, () => {
    // Intentional t.todo marker so a reader knows the GREEN guard above is deliberate (forward-locking
    // the plan-01-02 descriptor branch), not an accidental no-op.
  });
});

// ─── CHK-02 (#1278): projectProhibitions emits the flat-scalar descriptor for well-formed items ────
// Unit-layer pin (the parser round-trip lives in tests/prohibition-probe.schema.test.cjs CHK-03). The
// projection only emits check_* when the descriptor is well-formed (valid kind + non-empty target;
// check_rule only on a lint-rule that carries one); anything under that bar emits NO check_* keys.
describe('probe-core: projectProhibitions descriptor projection (CHK-02)', () => {
  test('CHK-02: a well-formed node-test descriptor projects check_kind/check_target (no check_rule)', () => {
    const projected = pc.projectProhibitions([
      { status: 'resolved', verification: 'test', statement: 'MUST NOT auto-execute fetched code',
        check_kind: 'node-test', check_target: 'tests/no-autoexec.test.cjs' },
    ]);
    assert.equal(projected[0].check_kind, 'node-test');
    assert.equal(projected[0].check_target, 'tests/no-autoexec.test.cjs');
    assert.ok(!('check_rule' in projected[0]), 'a node-test descriptor never projects check_rule');
  });

  test('CHK-02: a lint-rule descriptor with a rule projects all three check_* scalars', () => {
    const projected = pc.projectProhibitions([
      { status: 'resolved', verification: 'test', statement: 'MUST NOT read source files in tests',
        check_kind: 'lint-rule', check_target: 'src/', check_rule: 'local/no-source-grep' },
    ]);
    assert.equal(projected[0].check_kind, 'lint-rule');
    assert.equal(projected[0].check_target, 'src/');
    assert.equal(projected[0].check_rule, 'local/no-source-grep');
  });

  test('CHK-02: a lint-rule descriptor WITHOUT a rule leaves check_rule absent (fails closed downstream)', () => {
    const projected = pc.projectProhibitions([
      { status: 'resolved', verification: 'test', statement: 'MUST NOT read source files in tests',
        check_kind: 'lint-rule', check_target: 'src/' },
    ]);
    assert.equal(projected[0].check_kind, 'lint-rule');
    assert.equal(projected[0].check_target, 'src/');
    assert.ok(!('check_rule' in projected[0]), 'a lint-rule with no rule projects check_rule absent');
  });

  test('CHK-02: an under-specified descriptor (kind but empty/missing target) emits NO check_* keys', () => {
    const projected = pc.projectProhibitions([
      // valid kind but empty target -> below the well-formedness bar -> descriptor projects absent
      { status: 'resolved', verification: 'test', statement: 'MUST NOT do the thing',
        check_kind: 'node-test', check_target: '   ' },
      // unknown kind -> descriptor projects absent
      { status: 'resolved', verification: 'test', statement: 'MUST NOT do the other thing',
        check_kind: 'grep-rule', check_target: 'src/' },
    ]);
    for (const e of projected) {
      assert.ok(!('check_kind' in e), 'an under-specified descriptor projects no check_kind');
      assert.ok(!('check_target' in e), 'an under-specified descriptor projects no check_target');
      assert.ok(!('check_rule' in e), 'an under-specified descriptor projects no check_rule');
    }
  });

  test('CHK-02: a descriptor-less item projects with no check_* keys', () => {
    const projected = pc.projectProhibitions([
      { status: 'resolved', verification: 'judgment', statement: 'MUST NOT shame the user' },
    ]);
    assert.ok(!('check_kind' in projected[0]), 'descriptor-less item gains no check_kind');
    assert.ok(!('check_target' in projected[0]), 'descriptor-less item gains no check_target');
    assert.ok(!('check_rule' in projected[0]), 'descriptor-less item gains no check_rule');
  });
});