From 5589909b057ca2611dcfc6968a3ae03e31445c1f Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Lourince Daging <lourincedaging0@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 14 Jul 2026 22:05:59 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] fix(review): add missing duplicationDelta to
 REES_ANALYZER_NAMES
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

REES_ANALYZER_NAMES in enrichment-analyzer-names.ts is the canonical list that
validates operator `REES_ANALYZERS` env entries and per-repo `.loopover.yml`
`review.enrichment` toggles. It listed 56 analyzers but the generated
analyzer-metadata.json registry defines 57 — `duplicationDelta` (right next to
`duplication`) was the one gap. As a result resolveReesAnalyzers rejected
`duplicationDelta` as "invalid" for operators who listed it explicitly, and
resolveEnrichmentAnalyzerSelection could never honor a per-repo toggle for it.

Add the missing entry so the list exactly matches the metadata registry, and
add a parity test asserting REES_ANALYZER_NAMES and the registry stay in sync
(set equality against the registry as source of truth, so a future analyzer
can't silently drift the two apart), plus a regression assertion for
duplicationDelta and a no-duplicates check.
---
 .../src/review/enrichment-analyzer-names.ts   |  1 +
 src/review/enrichment-analyzer-names.ts       |  1 +
 .../enrichment-analyzers-taxonomy.test.ts     | 24 +++++++++++++++++++
 3 files changed, 26 insertions(+)

diff --git a/packages/loopover-engine/src/review/enrichment-analyzer-names.ts b/packages/loopover-engine/src/review/enrichment-analyzer-names.ts
index 7eec217916..1d13489cd4 100644
--- a/packages/loopover-engine/src/review/enrichment-analyzer-names.ts
+++ b/packages/loopover-engine/src/review/enrichment-analyzer-names.ts
@@ -26,6 +26,7 @@ export const REES_ANALYZER_NAMES = [
   "history",
   "docCommentDrift",
   "duplication",
+  "duplicationDelta",
   "churnHotspot",
   "blameLink",
   "approvalIntegrity",
diff --git a/src/review/enrichment-analyzer-names.ts b/src/review/enrichment-analyzer-names.ts
index 7eec217916..1d13489cd4 100644
--- a/src/review/enrichment-analyzer-names.ts
+++ b/src/review/enrichment-analyzer-names.ts
@@ -26,6 +26,7 @@ export const REES_ANALYZER_NAMES = [
   "history",
   "docCommentDrift",
   "duplication",
+  "duplicationDelta",
   "churnHotspot",
   "blameLink",
   "approvalIntegrity",
diff --git a/test/unit/enrichment-analyzers-taxonomy.test.ts b/test/unit/enrichment-analyzers-taxonomy.test.ts
index 2f191415ff..4a99e437f4 100644
--- a/test/unit/enrichment-analyzers-taxonomy.test.ts
+++ b/test/unit/enrichment-analyzers-taxonomy.test.ts
@@ -5,6 +5,7 @@ import {
   buildEnrichmentAnalyzersTaxonomyDocument,
   ENRICHMENT_ANALYZERS_URI,
 } from "../../src/review/enrichment-analyzers-taxonomy";
+import { REES_ANALYZER_NAMES } from "../../src/review/enrichment-analyzer-names";
 
 const metadataPath = join(process.cwd(), "review-enrichment/analyzer-metadata.json");
 
@@ -45,3 +46,26 @@ describe("enrichment analyzers taxonomy document", () => {
     expect(ENRICHMENT_ANALYZERS_URI).toBe("gittensory://enrichment-analyzers");
   });
 });
+
+describe("REES_ANALYZER_NAMES stays in sync with analyzer-metadata.json", () => {
+  const metadataNames = (
+    JSON.parse(readFileSync(metadataPath, "utf8")) as { analyzers: Array<{ name: string }> }
+  ).analyzers.map((a) => a.name);
+
+  it("covers exactly the analyzers the metadata registry defines (no missing, no extra)", () => {
+    // The canonical name list validates every operator `REES_ANALYZERS` env entry and per-repo
+    // `.loopover.yml review.enrichment` toggle, so an analyzer present in the metadata registry but absent
+    // here is silently un-toggleable/un-selectable. Compared as sets against the registry (the source of
+    // truth) rather than a hardcoded count so a newly-added analyzer can't drift the two apart unnoticed.
+    expect(new Set(REES_ANALYZER_NAMES)).toEqual(new Set(metadataNames));
+  });
+
+  it("includes duplicationDelta alongside duplication (regression for the one-entry gap)", () => {
+    expect(REES_ANALYZER_NAMES).toContain("duplication");
+    expect(REES_ANALYZER_NAMES).toContain("duplicationDelta");
+  });
+
+  it("has no duplicate entries", () => {
+    expect(new Set(REES_ANALYZER_NAMES).size).toBe(REES_ANALYZER_NAMES.length);
+  });
+});