ALL-COMM1001 · comment_intent
Classify why a comment exists with a local bounded model.
This is a contextual rule for all languages. Read its implementation.
Definition
Section titled “Definition”Compare the normalized comment text with its bounded preceding and following source. Choose
exactly one intent from affirmative words and local code. Directives and commented-out source
are excluded before model execution, as are API documentation and comments shorter than
minimum_tokens. If the local evidence does not establish one intent, return uncertain.
Evidence
Section titled “Evidence”The finding retains the model confidence and source path.
Exceptions
Section titled “Exceptions”Comment usefulness, truth, and staleness require separate evidence and rules. API documentation
and comments below minimum_tokens stay outside this local implementation-comment rule.
Examples
Section titled “Examples”# Retry because the service closes idle sockets is rationale. # Values are UTC is a
contract. # Increment count beside count += 1 is a restatement. A prediction the model
cannot make confidently comes back uncertain rather than guessed.
References
Section titled “References”- Cites “Clean Code”, chapter 4, Good Comments and Bad Comments
- Cites “A Philosophy of Software Design”, chapters 12 through 15
- Cites “GLiNER2 documentation”, classification tutorial