# Handoff Report - Milestone 5 Format Audit (memory_tools.py coverage)

## 1. Observation
- Target test file `tests/unit/tools/common/test_memory_tools.py` contains 29 unit tests.
- We executed the test command:
  ```bash
  pytest tests/unit/tools/common/test_memory_tools.py --cov=reversecore_mcp/tools/common/memory_tools.py --cov-report=term-missing -v
  ```
  All 29 tests passed successfully with 100% coverage on `reversecore_mcp/tools/common/memory_tools.py`:
  ```
  reversecore_mcp/tools/common/memory_tools.py              115      0   100%
  ============================== 29 passed in 3.67s ==============================
  ```
- Checked the git diff for `reversecore_mcp/tools/common/memory_tools.py` and found it was unmodified from HEAD. Only the test file `tests/unit/tools/common/test_memory_tools.py` had additions for testing edge cases (e.g. hash failure, DB initialization failure, missing dictionary keys, invalid importance types, directory paths).
- Verified that `reversecore_mcp/core/memory.py` is a genuine SQLite-backed FTS implementation. Its unit tests `tests/unit/core/test_memory.py` run against a real SQLite database instance (`tmp_path / "test_memory.db"`) and all 25 tests pass successfully.
- Ran Ruff and Black checks on `tests/unit/tools/common/test_memory_tools.py` which all passed. Ruff check on `reversecore_mcp/tools/common/memory_tools.py` passed, though Black formatting would reformat it (but since it is an unmodified file, it is outside our scope to modify).
- No pre-populated logs, result files, or verification artifacts were found in the workspace or the `.agents/auditor_m5_2/` directory.

## 2. Logic Chain
1. The objective is to verify the integrity and completeness of the formatted test suite for `memory_tools.py` coverage.
2. Based on the 100% coverage observation and the passing of all 29 tests, the coverage claims are verified.
3. Based on code inspection of `memory_tools.py` and its underlying backend `memory.py`, there are no facade implementations; all calls dynamically execute database operations on SQLite.
4. Based on the lack of hardcoded return values matching test outcomes in the source code, there are no hardcoded test results.
5. Under "Development Mode (lenient)", there are no prohibited patterns detected (no hardcoded test results, facade implementations, or fabricated outputs).
6. Therefore, the verdict is CLEAN.

## 3. Caveats
- No caveats. The codebase runs completely locally and database persistence has been verified using transient database test configurations.

## 4. Conclusion

## Forensic Audit Report

**Work Product**: `tests/unit/tools/common/test_memory_tools.py` & `reversecore_mcp/tools/common/memory_tools.py`
**Profile**: General Project
**Verdict**: CLEAN

### Phase Results
- **Hardcoded output detection**: PASS — Verified no expected outputs or PASS/FAIL strings are hardcoded in the source code to cheat tests.
- **Facade detection**: PASS — Verified that `MemoryToolsPlugin` and `MemoryStore` have full, genuine SQLite database-backed implementations.
- **Pre-populated artifact detection**: PASS — No pre-populated log files, result files, or cheat sheets were found in the workspace.
- **Behavioral verification**: PASS — All 29 tests execute successfully and coverage is exactly 100%.
- **Dependency audit**: PASS — Standard library and standard driver libraries (`aiosqlite`) are utilized appropriately.

## 5. Verification Method
To independently verify these results, run:
```bash
pytest tests/unit/tools/common/test_memory_tools.py --cov=reversecore_mcp/tools/common/memory_tools.py --cov-report=term-missing -v
```
To check formatting and style:
```bash
ruff check tests/unit/tools/common/test_memory_tools.py
black --check tests/unit/tools/common/test_memory_tools.py
```
