Skip to content

ALL-COMM1002 · comment_accuracy

Judge whether a comment remains accurate beside the current system.

This is a contextual rule for all languages. Read its implementation.

Compare the normalized comment claim with its bounded preceding and following source. Mark it current only when that source affirmatively agrees and stale only when it affirmatively contradicts the claim. Mark clearly labeled rationale about an earlier constraint as historical. Use ambiguous when the claim has several readings and uncertain when the bounded evidence cannot verify it. Directives, commented-out source, API documentation, and comments shorter than minimum_tokens are excluded.

Findings cite the comment, claimed behavior, contradictory or supporting facts, and history.

Historical rationale may remain useful when clearly marked and still relevant. API documentation and comments below minimum_tokens stay outside this local implementation check.

A comment saying retries occur three times is stale when configuration now allows five. A note explaining a protocol workaround remains current while that constraint exists.

  • Cites “Clean Code”, Comments
  • Cites “A Philosophy of Software Design”, comments and documentation
  • Cites “The Pragmatic Programmer”, documentation and knowledge drift