Coverage init

coverage-init

Run once per repo. Discovers the repo's shape and drafts the per-repo config. It DRAFTS; a human reviews and corrects before any test generation. Never proceed to generation in the same turn.

Precondition — run on the latest production branch (master)

The manifest, the detected structure, and the baseline number must reflect the code that ships, not an in-flight feature branch. Before doing anything else:

1. Confirm the repo is on the production branch (master). If checked out on a feature/topic branch, stop and ask the user to switch — do not init against feature work.
2. Pull it up to date with the remote (git fetch + fast-forward) so the baseline matches the current tip of master.
3. Confirm a clean working tree. Uncommitted local changes skew detection and the baseline; if the tree is dirty, stop and report rather than measuring against unknown edits.

State the branch and commit you initialized against in the step 11 report, so the eventual baseline.ref is traceable to a real production commit.

Steps

1. Detect SDK-style. Confirm projects are SDK-style .csproj (dotnet-coverage only supports these). If any target project is a legacy non-SDK .csproj, stop and report it — that project needs coverlet instead and is out of scope for this kit.

2. Inventory projects. List .csproj files and their references. Identify the test project(s) and what they reference. Identify likely roles (domain, application, infrastructure, presentation, workers) from project names, references, and folder layout. Detect whether MediatR is present (handlers vs pipeline behaviors).

3. Derive the TARGET-set hypothesis from the repo's architecture — do NOT apply a fixed template. The target is the code whose coverage is counted toward the headline ("Adjusted") number. This step only forms the hypothesis of where target code lives; the sweep (step 4) classifies the actual files. Based on step 2:

   • Clean / layered (distinct *.Domain, *.Application assemblies): candidate target is those layer assemblies; Infrastructure/Api/Web are informational.
   • Service-oriented / flat (no layer assemblies; logic in service projects or sub-folders of an API project): candidate target is the business-logic projects/sub-folders (e.g. Account.API/Service/**), by name + content — do not promote a whole API project if its logic is confined to a sub-folder.
   • No discernible structure: uncategorized; do not invent layering.

   Everything outside the target is informational: still collected and shown, but not counted toward Adjusted. The report is two-pass — Raw (all instrumented code) and Adjusted (target only); the ratchet gates Adjusted. Nothing is hidden.

4. Sweep — classify EVERY source file against the rubric, in parallel (ask first). Enumerate all source files: the candidate-target globs from step 3 and the rest of the instrumented production code (so exclusions are evidence-based, not assumed). Read every file. Do not classify by name/folder alone, do not skip small files, do not sample — small files get misclassified too, and fanning the sweep out removes the cost reason that ever justified skipping.

   Every file is classified by an objective signal in the source, cited at file:line (each rule is a concrete condition — the spec a future static-analysis helper would automate):

   Classification	Objective signal that justifies it
   dto-no-logic	only auto-properties / fields; no method body branches (if/switch/?:/loop); cyclomatic complexity ≈ 1. Not an AutoMapper Profile/mapping-config class (those are mapper-config, below)
   mapper-config	an AutoMapper Profile or mapping/DI-config class: declarative CreateMap/registration only, no branches today. Labeled distinctly from dto-no-logic so a future conditional MapFrom/ConvertUsing is not silently hidden under a "data carrier" label
   integration-scope	depends on a NON-SUBSTITUTABLE infrastructure boundary: a DbContext that is newed inline or reached through a static factory (no seam), raw SQL / provider-specific query translation an in-memory provider cannot run, HttpClient, file/network IO, or an external SDK client used directly. A DbContext INJECTED through the constructor is NOT this: it is a substitutable seam (EF in-memory / SQLite-in-memory), so its presence alone does not make a method integration-scope. See the exclusion-signal principle and signal table below.
   e2e-scope	ControllerBase/[ApiController], a hosted/background worker, or a Program/startup composition root
   generated	[GeneratedCode] attribute, a *.g.cs/*.Designer.cs file, or a Migrations/ path
   cannot_test: nondeterministic	a DateTime.Now/UtcNow, Guid.NewGuid, Random, Stopwatch, Environment call with no injected seam whose value flows into observable output — a return value, an emitted command/document, or persisted state. Dataflow-blind matching is the classic false positive: if the only consumer of the value is a logging/telemetry call (Serilog.Log.*, LogContext.PushProperty, ILogger, a Stopwatch timing an elapsed-ms log line), it is NOT nondeterministic — classify by the method's real behavior instead (usually the mapping → target/carve-out, or integration-scope if the body is DbContext-bound). A correlation-id/elapsed-ms logged on every handler is a house style, not an untestable seam
   target (unit-scope)	≥1 method whose body branches and every dependency is substitutable: an interface/abstract (mock it) OR a constructor-injected DbContext (back it with the EF in-memory / SQLite-in-memory provider). No inline-newed infra, no static factory, no clock/random used directly.

   The file's classification is a REPORTING label; testability is decided per method. A non-trivial file is rarely uniformly testable or untestable — the classification is its dominant signal, but the sweep must also record, for each non-trivial file, a per-method breakdown: { method, lines, testable, reason } (e.g. MapResult lines 40–58 testable; FetchRaw lines 60–95 not testable — direct HttpClient, no seam). This is what turns "this file is untestable" into "lines 40–58 testable, lines 60–95 not testable because …". Every method marked testable: true in a file that carries a non-target classification is a carve-out and MUST be listed in carveOutMethods so the backfill covers it.

   This applies to whole folders that "look" untestable, not just god-classes. Controllers/, **/Api/**, and *.Infrastructure projects are the classic trap: they get a blanket e2e-scope/integration-scope label, yet controller actions validate and branch before delegating, and IO orchestrators have pure mapping/decision methods between their calls. Read them for their carve-outs — do not let a folder-level verdict swallow the testable slice. A god-class (large or dependency-heavy, >~300 lines or many injected collaborators) is just the extreme case of this same rule: classify by dominant signal, carve out the pure logic (the UserService pattern). A file gets trivial/no-carve-out treatment only when it genuinely has zero deterministic branching methods.

   Target vs carve-out is decided by the MAJORITY of the public surface, because target uses the whole-file denominator. A target file counts every instrumented line toward Adjusted, and cannot_test entries do NOT subtract from a target file's denominator. So a god-class whose public methods are mostly IO-bound must NOT be labeled target: as target its unavoidable IO lines are counted uncovered forever and no amount of testing lifts it. Decide by counting the public methods. If a majority of the public surface is unit-testable (pure/seamable, injected DbContext included), keep the file target and route the few genuinely IO-bound methods to cannot_test. If a majority is genuinely IO-bound, classify the FILE as integration-scope and carve OUT the pure methods; they stay in scope and counted over the carve-out denominator, not the whole file. Getting this backwards is a recurring failure mode. An IO-dominant service shipped as full target tanks Adjusted and cannot be fixed by adding tests, while a pure-logic service demoted to integration-scope hides real coverage debt.

   An exclusion signal names a boundary, not a verdict, and a reason may never be the signal restated. Every rubric row except target is a SURFACE signal: a type, base class, folder, or import. It marks WHERE an untestable boundary sits; it is never, on its own, proof the file's logic is untestable. The most damaging and most repeated failure of this kit is excluding a whole file because it "has" such a signal, with a reason that only echoes the signal ("uses a DbContext", "it's a Controller", "Lambda entry point"). That is not a reasonable explanation and is not accepted. For every non-trivial file carrying an exclusion signal you MUST walk its methods, and each excluded method's reason must be a PROVEN NEGATIVE about that method (the specific un-seamable dependency its own body reaches), not the file's surface signal. The decision / validation / mapping / computation logic that sits around the boundary is testable and is a carve-out (or, when it dominates, target). Common signals, where the genuine boundary is, and what stays testable:

   Surface signal	The genuine untestable boundary	What stays testable (carve-out / target)
   constructor-injected DbContext	raw SQL (FromSqlRaw) / provider-specific LINQ; SaveChanges + external dispatch	validation, branching, mapping, computation, driven against an EF in-memory / SQLite context
   HttpClient / typed client	the send over the wire	request building, response mapping, retry/branch logic (stub HttpMessageHandler or the client interface)
   ControllerBase / [ApiController]	routing, model-binding, framework filters	the action's guard / validation / authorization branches before it delegates (construct the controller, call the action)
   Lambda / hosted worker / Program.cs	host and trigger wiring	the handler's injected services and its pure per-item steps
   *Repository / *.Infrastructure naming	the persistence / IO call itself	any decision or shaping logic the name hides
   static factory or inline-newed context (RedisCacheFactory, new SomeContext())	THIS is the genuine no-seam case	nothing, until a seam is introduced: log requires-source-change with that seam as the mitigation

   Only the last row is a true whole-unit blocker. For every other signal a bare whole-file exclusion is a false exclusion until a per-method walk proves each method genuinely reaches the boundary. Fidelity caveat for the in-memory provider: it does not translate raw SQL or enforce relational constraints, so it verifies logic shape, not query correctness; prefer SQLite-in-memory when the query itself is under test, and leave raw-SQL methods in integration scope. (Field-proven miss: dozens of CustomerContext-injected services labeled "no seam, cannot unit test" while a sibling target service was already unit-tested against the same in-memory context.)

   Hard rule: no bare (no-carve-out) exclusion is accepted without a per-method re-scan. This applies to EVERY non-trivial file with a non-target label; the largest files are the highest-risk case, not the only one. A big multi-method service is the likeliest place to under-carve: the file gets judged whole, one integration-scope label, and its pure validator/mapper cluster is lost. So for any file above a size/method-count threshold (rule of thumb: >~400 lines OR >~10 methods) that you are about to label integration-scope/e2e-scope with an EMPTY carveOutMethods, you MUST first walk its methods and prove each is genuinely IO-bound. A large bare exclusion is a red flag, not a default — the real case (e.g. a 2,400-line preset service hiding ValidateFileFormat, ValidateWidthHeight, IsInvalidAssignment) is that several pure validators were missed. The critique (step 6) treats every large bare exclusion as a lead to re-open.

   Trivial files are marked, not surfaced. A tiny file (~15 lines or fewer) that is high-confidence excluded — a DTO/record of auto-properties only, an interface, an enum with no behavior — is flagged trivial. These get collapsed into glob patterns at synthesis (step 5), not carried as per-file rows. On a large repo they are often ~40% of the files and the lowest-signal rows; collapsing them keeps the manifest and the critique focused.

   Run the sweep the same way as the backfill — fan it out at a user-chosen parallelism:

   1. Count the files to classify and ask the user how many agents to run, suggesting counts scaled to that size and the context (rough: small repo → 1; medium → 3; large / many-project → 6–10; more agents finish sooner but cost proportionally more tokens).
   2. Clear coverage/sweep/ first (rm -rf coverage/sweep) so a prior or crashed run cannot leave stale chunk-N.json files behind — a different chunk count would otherwise mix old and new evidence. Then write the enumerated paths to disk as a JSON array at coverage/sweep/files.json (e.g. pipe your file enumeration through jq -R . | jq -s ., or write the array directly). Pass the manifest path, never the list itself — a large inline files array mis-parses in the tool call, and inlining it into the workflow script trips the approval-dialog control-char guard (CRLF from a Windows heredoc). Then invoke Workflow({ scriptPath: "${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/workflows/coverage-sweep.workflow.js", args: { concurrency: <chosen>, filesManifest: "coverage/sweep/files.json", rubric: "<the table above>", evidenceDir: "coverage/sweep" } }). If the user just says "go", default concurrency: 3.

   Evidence goes to disk, not into context. Each chunk agent writes ALL its per-file rows { path, classification, signal, confidence, trivial, carveOutMethods, methodBreakdown, notes } to coverage/sweep/chunk-N.json, and returns only a compact summary: counts per classification, the trivial count, and the rows that need a look (low-confidence, god-classes, surprising). coverage/ is git-ignored (step 8), so this evidence is transient. The sweep is read-only on production source and never writes the manifest.

5. Synthesize the draft at main (single — NOT parallel). Read the on-disk evidence (coverage/sweep/chunk-*.json) — do not rely on rows being in the conversation; on a large repo the full set is thousands of rows and lives in those files. Merge it into one coherent draft: category_map (the target globs), exclusions (each non-target classification, grouped into patterns with the rubric signal as the reason), and cannot_test (the nondeterministic-no-seam methods only — each with a mitigation). Carve-outs are NOT cannot_test: they are testable methods that stay IN scope. For every non-target file with ≥1 testable: true method, emit a PER-FILE exclusion entry (never a folder glob) carrying a structured carve_outs: list, one item per method as { method, lines, testable }, plus an excluded_rest note stating why the remainder is out of scope. The gate keeps each carve-out method IN scope and counted. A folder glob may cover ONLY a uniformly-excluded set (no testable method anywhere under it), so a mixed folder is split into one entry per file. This is what stops a mixed file from collapsing into a single ambiguous line, and it ties each method to its own file so a carve-out cannot leak across files (the gate warns when a carve-out-bearing pattern matches more than one file). The legacy CARVE-OUT: MethodA, MethodB prose in reason is still parsed for back-compat, but emit the structured form.

   Same-named files MUST be disambiguated by full repo-relative path. Repos routinely have several files sharing a basename (UserService.cs, Handler.cs, Mapper.cs) in different projects or folders. A bare UserService.cs or **/UserService.cs glob silently collapses them into one row: one classification wrongly applied to all of them, and carve-out methods leaking across unrelated files. Every manifest pattern (target glob, exclusion, carve-out entry) whose basename is not unique in the repo MUST use the file's full repo-relative path (src/Account.Api/Services/UserService.cs), never the basename alone. The sweep already records the full path per row; carry it through to the manifest verbatim. The gate's "pattern matches more than one file" warning is the backstop, but resolve it at synthesis rather than shipping the ambiguous glob. Putting a carve-out into cannot_test would drop the very method the backfill must cover, the opposite of the granularity goal. Collapse trivial files into glob exclusion patterns by directory (e.g. **/Dtos/** → dto-no-logic) instead of one row each; emit per-file detail only for non-trivial files. Normalize across chunks — parallel agents drift in vocabulary (one says integration-scope, another infra); reconcile to one category set and resolve cross-project boundaries. This must be one head: the whole-repo view is what makes the manifest coherent and consistent.

   Verify every pattern actually matches the paths it intends — a written pattern is a hypothesis until joined against real paths. A glob that silently matches nothing leaks those files into application/uncategorized, inflating the Adjusted denominator with uncovered code (and a glob that matches too much wrongly shrinks it). After collapsing to globs, re-apply the globs to the swept file list and assert each file lands in the bucket its sweep row assigned; any divergence is a pattern bug to fix now, not at measure time. Watch the failure modes that caused real leaks in the field:

   • Path/segment typos. A file under Integration/Looker/Implemetations/LookerService.cs is NOT matched by **/Integration/LookerService.cs. Pattern the real path, and don't trust folder names from memory (note the misspelled Implemetations).
   • Dot-segment vs plain-segment. **/*.Model/** matches a project folder named Foo.Model but NOT a plain Model/ folder; **/DataAccess/** matches DataAccess/ but NOT Foo.DataAccess/. Add both forms (**/Model/** / **/*.DataAccess/**) when the repo uses both. DTOs/host files also leak when they live outside the expected folder (Program.cs, Startup.cs, **/Filters/**, **/*Assembly.cs, DI ServiceExtensions.cs).
   • Filename collisions across projects. The same class name in N projects (e.g. SendEmailService.cs, RedisHelper.cs, AccountService.cs, UserInfoService.cs) often has DIFFERENT classifications per project. A bare **/Name.cs applies one verdict to all; when they differ, emit a path-qualified entry per project and confirm each resolves to its own bucket. Also exclude test code itself (**/Tests/** → non-product) so test fixtures never count toward Adjusted.

   This pattern-vs-path verification is cheap (it runs against the swept file list already on disk — no coverage run needed) and catches the class of bug that otherwise only surfaces as a mysteriously-low Adjusted number after the whole backfill is done.

6. Critique the synthesized draft (a single agent, deliberately NOT parallel). A wrong manifest is the most damaging error here — excluding testable code hides real gaps, including untestable code produces churn and false "needs attention" noise. One reviewer reads the draft and the on-disk evidence (coverage/sweep/chunk-*.json) — load it in slices / group by signal, do not pull all rows into context at once. Kept single on purpose: a systematic mistake — the same misclassification repeated across projects (e.g. mappers-with-branches labelled dto-no-logic everywhere) — is only visible to a reviewer who sees all of it at once, and one reviewer applies one consistent standard; parallel critics would each rationalize the repeated error locally. Group by signal → label to surface repeated mismatches cheaply, prioritize the sweep's attention rows, and spot-read — you do not re-read every file. Using the step 4 rubric, a classification is a mismatch when the label is not supported by its signal; check both directions:

   • False exclusions (testable code wrongly skipped): a file labelled dto-no-logic that actually branches, or integration-scope with no infra dependency, has the target signal and belongs in scope.
   • False inclusions (untestable code wrongly kept): a target file that is really IO orchestration → integration-scope with a carve-out; nondeterministic-no-seam → cannot_test.
   • Classic traps (signal hiding under a misleading name): DTOs with validation/computed members; "infrastructure"-named pure logic; mappers with conditional logic; enums with behavior.
   • Verify NEGATIVE citations against source — the sweep's attention list cannot catch these. A confidently-wrong exclusion rests on a negative claim ("auto-properties only", "no seam", "no branches") that is high-confidence, so it never appears in attention, and reading only the evidence rows cannot reveal that the claim itself is false. Sample the high-confidence exclusions per bucket and per project and open the actual file to confirm the negative claim holds (no if/switch/?:/loop; the collaborator really is not an injected interface). One wrong negative claim, repeated across a project by pattern, is the largest silent false-exclusion — spend the reads here, not on the already-flagged rows.
   • Missing carve-outs are false exclusions. For every integration-scope/e2e-scope file, check its per-method breakdown: any deterministic branching method not listed in carveOutMethods is testable code silently dropped. Add it as a carve-out.
   • A reason that only restates a surface signal is a defect; audit exclusions by signal-class. Group the exclusions by their signal (DbContext, HttpClient, Controller, Lambda, Repository/Infrastructure naming) and check each group as a population. Any file excluded because it "uses" the signal, with no per-method proven negative, is re-opened. The label survives only for the specific methods that reach a genuine boundary (raw SQL, provider-specific translation, an inline-newed/static context, the send over the wire, bare persistence plumbing); the decision/validation/mapping logic around it is carved out or promoted. A constructor-injected DbContext treated as whole-file-untestable is the classic instance.
   • Dataflow-blind nondeterministic is THE recurring false positive — audit it as a population, not row-by-row. Pull every nondeterministic entry at once and check where the flagged Guid.NewGuid/Stopwatch/DateTime.Now value actually goes. If its only consumer is a logging/telemetry call (Serilog.Log.*, LogContext.PushProperty, ILogger, a Stopwatch for an elapsed-ms log), the entry is wrong: reclassify to the method's real behavior — target/carve-out if the body is a pure mapping, or integration-scope if the body is DbContext-bound (correctly frozen, but for the wrong reason). This is a house-style pattern (correlation-id + elapsed-ms on every handler), so it clusters — a batch of near-identical handler entries frozen for a logged Guid is the signature. Expect to reclassify most of them.
   • Large bare exclusions. Any integration-scope/e2e-scope file above ~400 lines / ~10 methods with an EMPTY carveOutMethods is a lead to re-open — a whole-file judgment likely missed a pure validator/mapper cluster. Re-scan its methods before accepting the bare label.
   • EF / LINQ query logic runs on the in-memory provider, so it is testable. A method doing .Where/.Select/.OrderBy/.GroupBy/.ToListAsync over an INJECTED DbContext executes on UseInMemoryDatabase/SQLite and is testable, INCLUDING the projection inside a .Select(x => new Dto{...}). Only genuinely provider-specific bits are not: FromSqlRaw/raw SQL, a stored proc, or a SQL function/collation the in-memory provider cannot translate. Treat "the LINQ is too provider-specific to run" as a claim to VERIFY against the actual query, never a default. After the DbContext-seam fix, over-excluded EF queries are the single most likely remaining swallow.
   • Half-testable methods: the validation/guard/mapping FRONT of an IO method is testable even when the tail is not. A method that validates inputs (throws), branches, or maps BEFORE it touches the DbContext/HttpClient has a testable slice, those pre-IO branches are assertable (a thrown validation, an early return). Do not stamp the whole method testable:false; carve out the pre-IO logic with its line range and exclude only the IO tail.
   • Static, extension, internal, and base-class logic is testable, so a folder or an access modifier must not hide it. A pure static helper or a public static ... this extension method is directly unit-testable wherever it sits. An internal method is testable via InternalsVisibleTo (adding it is a seam, not a blocker). Concrete branching logic on an abstract/base class is testable through a minimal test subclass. Each is a routine swallow when a file is judged by its folder or by "cannot instantiate".
   • Inline new is a no-seam problem ONLY for infrastructure. new SomeDbContext() / new HttpClient() / a static infra factory blocks unit testing; new-ing a PURE value object, DTO, Regex, calculator, or comparer does not. Never mark a method untestable for constructing a deterministic in-process object.
   • Nondeterminism with an ALREADY-injected seam is requires-source-change, not permanent. If the class injects an IClock/IClockService/id/random provider yet a method reads DateTime.UtcNow/Guid.NewGuid DIRECTLY, routing it through the injected seam is a one-line fix: log requires-source-change with that mitigation, never a permanent nondeterministic exemption.
   • Whole-project / whole-folder exclusions are the coarsest swallow, so open at least one file per excluded project. A project-level glob (**/*.Infrastructure/**, **/DataAccess/**, **/*.Api/**) is valid only if EVERY file under it is genuinely untestable. Sample a file from each blanket-excluded project/folder and confirm no pure calculator/validator/mapper lives there; one testable class in an "Infrastructure" project is a false exclusion.
   • Vendored third-party code stays excluded, but only by its copyright header, not its folder. A file carrying a third-party copyright (e.g. Copyright (c) Microsoft) is non-product; a sibling file in the SAME folder WITHOUT that header is the repo's OWN code and is classified by its logic. Never blanket a whole vendored-SDK folder as non-product when the repo's concrete provider/service (e.g. a SCIM Scim*Service doing user/group CRUD over an injected context) lives beside it, that is exactly how a real product implementation gets swallowed.

   Reconcile as a loop: apply the clear-cut corrections (signal unambiguously contradicts the label) to the draft, then re-check the corrected entries; repeat until no clear-cut mismatch remains. Only then carry the genuine gray-zone disagreements into the step 11 report as explicit questions — do not silently resolve them. The human adjudicates only the few ambiguous cases.

   STRICT exit condition — no testable code swallowed. The critique does not pass until, for EVERY exclusion entry, each class above has been checked against the actual source and the entry is backed by a per-method PROVEN NEGATIVE (the specific no-seam boundary each excluded method hits), never a surface signal. An exclusion whose only justification is a type, folder, base class, access modifier, or "uses a DbContext" is a defect and is re-opened. When in doubt about a single method, the default is IN scope (carve it out), not swallowed — a wrongly-included method costs one skippable test; a wrongly-excluded one hides a real gap forever.

7. Write files into the repo (do not overwrite without confirmation). Lay .claude/coverage/ out in subfolders by role — tools/ (executable scripts), refs/ (config + the testing-rules overlay), reports/ (the committed report snapshot), history/ (gitignored local trend):

   • .claude/coverage/refs/coverage-manifest.yml — from the template, filled with the critique-corrected draft. Unresolved open questions are written with their current (pre-critique) classification and noted as pending in the step 11 report. Keep the template's target block (default C0 95% / C1 85% on the Adjusted slice) as the coverage goal, and set gate.diff_coverage_min_* to match it so new code lands at the target. Confirm the goal with the user in the step 11 report (a thin Adjusted slice may not sustain 95% C1).
   • .claude/coverage/refs/coverage.runsettings — copied from the kit template.
   • .claude/coverage/tools/run-coverage.sh — copied from the kit's scripts/. Committed so CI (which does not run Claude Code) can invoke it at a stable path, identical to local runs.
   • .claude/coverage/tools/coverage-gate.py — copied from the kit's scripts/. The in-scope join + gate + Unit Test Report CI runs after run-coverage.sh (needs Python + PyYAML).
   • .claude/coverage/tools/report.sh — copied from the kit's scripts/. One-command wrapper (collect + gate + write a dated reports/<YYYY-MM-DD>/ with REPORT.{md,html} + generated CANNOT-TEST.md, one folder per run). It resolves ../refs and ../reports relative to itself, so the tools/refs/reports split is a hard contract — keep the scripts in tools/ and config in refs/.
   • .claude/coverage/refs/unit-testing.md — the per-repo overlay. Starts as a pointer to the base rules plus this repo's specifics: which projects the test project may reference, the mocking strategy for this stack, repo-specific exclusions, the Enforcement section, and the Maintaining the manifest contract (from the base rule). For a flat/legacy repo this carries more; for clean-arch it is thin.
   • .claude/coverage/reports/ — created empty; the first report.sh run fills it. Committed.

8. Set .gitignore correctly — committed config vs throwaway output vs local trend:

   • Ignore the regenerated output dir coverage/ at the repo root (HTML drill-down, cobertura, results) — never commit it.
   • Ignore .claude/coverage/history/ — ReportGenerator drops one trend snapshot per run there; committing a per-run XML is churn and CI can't accumulate it anyway. Local-only.
   • Do NOT ignore the rest of .claude/coverage/ — tools/, refs/, and reports/ are committed config + the report snapshot.

9. Scaffold the PR coverage workflow — without clobbering or duplicating existing CI. First, verify every test project is a member of the target .sln. Compare the discovered test projects (those referencing Microsoft.NET.Test.Sdk) against dotnet sln <solution> list. CI does a clean dotnet build <solution> then dotnet test <proj> --no-build, so a test project that is NOT in the solution is never built and runs 0 tests while still exiting 0: a silent, misleading undercount (a real onboarding ran 596 of 2004 tests and reported 35% instead of 82.9%). For any test project missing from the solution, tell the user to add it (dotnet sln <solution> add <project>) before relying on CI, and list the missing projects in the step 11 report. run-coverage.sh now hard-fails on this, so an unfixed one breaks CI loudly rather than undercounting, but catching it here avoids a red first run.

   Then inspect .github/workflows/ for existing workflow files. Decide, in this order:

   • A coverage workflow already exists (a coverage.yml, or any workflow that already runs run-coverage.sh) → do not overwrite or add a second one. Report it; at most offer a diff for the user to apply by hand.
   • A workflow already runs the test suite on PRs into the production branch (look for dotnet test under a pull_request trigger targeting master) → do not add a second workflow that rebuilds and retests — that doubles CI minutes and creates two competing gates. Instead, propose adding the two coverage steps (run run-coverage.sh, then publish SummaryGithub.md to $GITHUB_STEP_SUMMARY) into that existing workflow, and present it as a suggested diff. Do not edit their workflow automatically.
   • No existing PR-test or coverage workflow → write .github/workflows/coverage.yml from ${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/templates/coverage-workflow.yml, filled with the detected solution path, SDK version, and production branch name. Confirm the gate step keeps --base origin/${{ github.base_ref }} — without it only the ratchet runs and new untested code is not caught (the ratchet barely moves on a large repo). If step 2's inventory found relative ProjectReferences into sibling repos (e.g. ..\..\..\<sibling>\...), fill the sibling-checkout block: check this repo out under path: and each sibling out beside it, or CI cannot build and the gate never runs. State the sibling repos + assumed org/ref in the step 11 report for the human to confirm.

   Never modify or delete any other workflow file. Record which path you took (created / skipped-because-exists / proposed-merge) in the step 11 report.

   Tell the user the gate is only advisory until they make it binding (you cannot do this for them — it is a GitHub setting): in branch protection for the production branch, require the Coverage status check to pass before merging, and treat the baseline floor in the manifest as move-up-only (lowering it is a reviewed change). Surface this as an explicit action item in the step 11 report.

10. Wire context loading. A plugin's rules do not auto-load into a repo's context. Tell the user to add an import of .claude/coverage/refs/unit-testing.md to the repo's CLAUDE.md so the convention is in context while writing tests.

11. Comprehensiveness gate — do not report or stop until the scan is provably complete. The point of stopping is to hand a human a trustworthy, complete draft; a report over a partial or unreconciled scan is worse than no report. Before writing the step-11 report, assert ALL of the following, and if any fails, fix it and re-check — do not proceed:

• Every enumerated file is accounted for. filesClassified == filesPlanned from the sweep result (0 unaccounted). If a chunk failed and files are missing, re-sweep the gap — do not report over a hole. The workflow returns this; act on it, never just note it.
• The enumeration itself was complete. The swept set covers all instrumented production source — no source directory silently omitted from files.json. Cross-check the enumerated paths against the project/folder inventory from step 2; a whole folder missing from the sweep is the same failure as a folder blanket-excluded.
• No testable method was swallowed. Every integration-scope/e2e-scope file with a deterministic branching method has that method recorded as a carve-out (the step-6 check passed for all such files, not a sample).
• The critique loop has settled. No clear-cut mismatch remains; only genuine gray-zone questions are left, and those are carried into the report as explicit questions.
• Every test project is a solution member. dotnet sln <solution> list includes each discovered Microsoft.NET.Test.Sdk project. Any that is missing is called out in the report with the dotnet sln add fix, because CI would otherwise silently undercount (see step 9).

State in the report that this gate passed, with the file counts. Only genuine ambiguity is deferred to the human — incompleteness is not.

Report the draft and stop. Show the proposed category_map and exclusions with a one-line rationale each, the detected test-project reference boundary, and the critique findings — split into corrections already applied and open questions the human must decide. Ask the user to confirm or correct the category_map and exclusions before running generate-tests. Flag anything ambiguous as a question rather than guessing.

Base references

• ${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/rules/unit-testing.base.md
• ${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/rules/coverage-report.base.md
• ${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/templates/coverage-manifest.yml
• ${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/templates/coverage.runsettings
• ${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/templates/coverage-workflow.yml
• ${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/scripts/run-coverage.sh
• ${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/scripts/coverage-gate.py
• ${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/scripts/report.sh
• ${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/workflows/coverage-sweep.workflow.js