docs: add per-module coverage target

[WilliamK112]

Summary

• add a make coverage-report target that runs the same fast test scope as PR CI and prints the per-file term-missing table
• advertise the target in make help
• point contributors from the roadmap's Testing tier to the live report and the currently thin semantic-consistency and execution-abstraction areas

Closes #163.

Validation

• make coverage-report PY=<project-venv>/bin/python — 4051 passed, 6 skipped, 12 deselected; 93.16% total coverage with the per-module missing-lines table
• python -m mkdocs build --strict
• make -n coverage-report
• make help
• git diff --check

AI usage

I used Codex to inspect the repository's existing coverage configuration, implement the scoped Makefile/docs changes, and run the validation above. I reviewed the final diff and command output.

[coderabbitai]

Warning

Review limit reached

@WilliamK112, you've reached your PR review limit, so we couldn't start this review.

Next review available in: 29 minutes

You've used all free OSS reviews for now. Wait for the free limit to reset to keep reviewing this public repository.

How can I continue?

After more reviews become available, a review can be triggered using the @coderabbitai review command as a PR comment. Alternatively, push new commits to this PR.

To avoid repeated limits, reduce automatic review volume by pausing incremental auto-reviews earlier, using label-based review opt-in, excluding WIP or generated PR titles, or requesting reviews manually when the PR is ready. If your team needs uninterrupted high-volume reviews, an organization admin can enable usage-based reviews.

How do review limits work?

CodeRabbit enforces per-developer PR review limits for each organization. Most developers receive the normal plan review availability.

For paid Pro and Pro+ PR reviews, CodeRabbit uses adaptive limits for sustained high-volume activity. When a developer's recent PR review activity reaches the 95th percentile or higher among CodeRabbit users, additional reviews become available more gradually as earlier reviews age out of the rolling window.

Please refer docs for additional details.

Review details

⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: defaults

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro Plus

Run ID: e6b3961f-2ebf-4544-8282-5c653be97104

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between f4cf5d8 and f9aed0f.

📒 Files selected for processing (2)

• Makefile
• docs/community/contributor-roadmap.md

---

Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ Share

• X
• Mastodon
• Reddit
• LinkedIn

_{Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands.}

[strix-security]

Strix is installed on this repository, but we couldn't run this PR security review because this workspace's trial has ended. Add a card to resume code reviews here.

So far, Strix has reviewed 36 pull requests, surfaced 3 security issues (1 critical/high) and blocked 1 risky merge across this workspace.

[kevincostner17]

Verdict: Valid — approve

Checked against #163.

Acceptance criteria

Criterion	Status
Documented command prints per-file coverage	Pass — make coverage-report runs the fast lane with --cov-report=term-missing
Roadmap Testing tier references it	Pass
mkdocs build --strict	Pass (author + CI)

Notes

• The target is a thin wrapper over the existing pytest addopts (--cov-report=term-missing is already in pyproject.toml). That’s still the right contributor-facing command.
• Pointing people at semantic.consistency and execution/ as current thin spots is reasonable; the “use the live report, don’t hard-code a %” wording is the important part.

Small, useful docs/tooling PR. Good to merge.

[kevincostner17]

Nice one, @WilliamK112 — make coverage-report is exactly the kind of contributor-facing helper #163 asked for.

Pointing people at the live per-module table (instead of a hard-coded %) is the right call. Thanks for landing this.