build(deps-dev): bump eslint-plugin-jsdoc from 63.3.3 to 64.2.1

[dependabot]

Bumps eslint-plugin-jsdoc from 63.3.3 to 64.2.1.

Release notes

Sourced from eslint-plugin-jsdoc's releases.

v64.2.1

64.2.1 (2026-08-17)

Bug Fixes

• update jsdcoccomment, devDeps (#1746) (dc99c3c)

v64.2.0

64.2.0 (2026-08-15)

Features

• check-param-names: add order fixer and suggestions (#1732) (8a37bd2)

v64.1.0

64.1.0 (2026-08-10)

Features

• update jsdoccomment, devDeps.; use nodenext for module properties in TS (7309d7d)

v64.0.2

64.0.2 (2026-08-09)

Bug Fixes

• update jsdoccomment and devDep. (fbe2a2b)

v64.0.1

64.0.1 (2026-08-08)

Bug Fixes

• resume support for CJS via require(esm) (343516a)

v64.0.0

64.0.0 (2026-08-07)

Features

• ESM only; fixes #1626 (9c9b723)

BREAKING CHANGES

... (truncated)

Commits

• dc99c3c fix: update jsdcoccomment, devDeps (#1746)
• 8a37bd2 feat(check-param-names): add order fixer and suggestions (#1732)
• 7309d7d feat: update jsdoccomment, devDeps.; use nodenext for module properties in TS
• 4de1b19 chore: update jsdoccomment, devDep.
• fbe2a2b fix: update jsdoccomment and devDep.
• 343516a fix: resume support for CJS via require(esm)
• 7e94c04 chore: update jsdoccomment, comment-parser, devDeps.
• 9c9b723 feat: ESM only; fixes #1626
• See full diff in compare view

[opencode-agent]

Pull request overview

OpenCode cannot approve yet because required coverage evidence did not pass.

Review outcome

1. HIGH .github/workflows/opencode-review.yml:1 - Coverage evidence did not prove required test/docstring evidence

• Problem: The required coverage-evidence job result was failure, so OpenCode cannot establish approval sufficiency for this head.

• Root cause: Automated approval is only valid when the same-head coverage-evidence job proves supported repository test suites passed and configured docstring gates passed or were advisory, or reports not applicable because no supported source files or package manifests exist. Missing, failed, skipped, unavailable, or unsupported-tooling test evidence is a blocker.

• Fix: Install or configure the repository test/docstring evidence tooling when source files or package manifests exist, rerun the current-head coverage-evidence job, and approve only after it reports success with required evidence or explicit no-source not-applicable evidence.

• Regression test: Keep the approval branch checking needs.coverage-evidence.result == success before posting APPROVE, and publish REQUEST_CHANGES when coverage-evidence blocker states such as cancelled, skipped, failed, unsupported-tooling, or below-100 evidence are present.

• Result: REQUEST_CHANGES

• Reason: coverage-evidence result was failure, so required test/docstring evidence was not proven for current head f87c0fbdca3b69af444a617412e3d620171b2ee4.

• Head SHA: f87c0fbdca3b69af444a617412e3d620171b2ee4

• Workflow run: 32188602473

• Workflow attempt: 1

Coverage evidence

Coverage evidence job did not run or did not publish coverage evidence.

Changed-File Evidence Map

flowchart LR
  PR["PR changed files"] --> Evidence["OpenCode bounded evidence"]
  Evidence --> S1["Changed file (2 files)"]
  S1 --> I1["repository behavior"]
  I1 --> R1["Review risk: Changed file (2 files)"]
  R1 --> V1["required checks"]

Loading

[opencode-agent]

OpenCode Review Overview

• Head SHA: f87c0fbdca3b69af444a617412e3d620171b2ee4
• Workflow run: 32193263753
• Workflow attempt: 1
• Gate result: REQUEST_CHANGES (approval step)

Pull request overview

OpenCode cannot approve yet because required coverage evidence did not pass.

Review outcome

1. HIGH .github/workflows/opencode-review.yml:1 - Coverage evidence did not prove required test/docstring evidence

• Problem: The required coverage-evidence job result was failure, so OpenCode cannot establish approval sufficiency for this head.

• Root cause: Automated approval is only valid when the same-head coverage-evidence job proves supported repository test suites passed and configured docstring gates passed or were advisory, or reports not applicable because no supported source files or package manifests exist. Missing, failed, skipped, unavailable, or unsupported-tooling test evidence is a blocker.

• Fix: Install or configure the repository test/docstring evidence tooling when source files or package manifests exist, rerun the current-head coverage-evidence job, and approve only after it reports success with required evidence or explicit no-source not-applicable evidence.

• Regression test: Keep the approval branch checking needs.coverage-evidence.result == success before posting APPROVE, and publish REQUEST_CHANGES when coverage-evidence blocker states such as cancelled, skipped, failed, unsupported-tooling, or below-100 evidence are present.

• Result: REQUEST_CHANGES

• Reason: coverage-evidence result was failure, so required test/docstring evidence was not proven for current head f87c0fbdca3b69af444a617412e3d620171b2ee4.

• Head SHA: f87c0fbdca3b69af444a617412e3d620171b2ee4

• Workflow run: 32193263753

• Workflow attempt: 1

Coverage evidence

Coverage evidence job did not run or did not publish coverage evidence.

Changed-File Evidence Map

flowchart LR
  PR["PR changed files"] --> Evidence["OpenCode bounded evidence"]
  Evidence --> S1["Changed file (2 files)"]
  S1 --> I1["repository behavior"]
  I1 --> R1["Review risk: Changed file (2 files)"]
  R1 --> V1["required checks"]

Loading

[seonghobae]

Converted this PR to Draft because its own upstream compatibility contract is stricter than BandScope's protected-base runtime contract. Exact head remains f87c0fbdca3b69af444a617412e3d620171b2ee4 on develop@acdbea6344fe1231c39535b575f4de35e4c607c9; eslint-plugin-jsdoc 64.x requires Node ^22.22.2 || >=24.15.0, while the authoritative root package.json still advertises >=22.13 <23. That would make a green hosted run insufficient for users/builders on 22.13.0–22.22.1. Issue #779 and canonical Draft #896 (build(node): coordinate Node 22.22.2 floor with jsdom 30) own the coordinated Node 22.22.2 minimum-version migration, exact-floor CI, npm 10.9.8 provenance, and lock regeneration. Keep this standalone dependency bump Draft until that compatibility boundary is integrated/reconciled, or replace it with a version compatible with the current published floor. The current OpenCode CHANGES_REQUESTED is separately a central coverage-control-plane failure, not evidence that this Node incompatibility is repaired.

[opencode-agent]

Pull request overview

OpenCode cannot approve yet because required coverage evidence did not pass.

Review outcome

1. HIGH .github/workflows/opencode-review.yml:1 - Coverage evidence did not prove required test/docstring evidence

• Problem: The required coverage-evidence job result was failure, so OpenCode cannot establish approval sufficiency for this head.

• Root cause: Automated approval is only valid when the same-head coverage-evidence job proves supported repository test suites passed and configured docstring gates passed or were advisory, or reports not applicable because no supported source files or package manifests exist. Missing, failed, skipped, unavailable, or unsupported-tooling test evidence is a blocker.

• Fix: Install or configure the repository test/docstring evidence tooling when source files or package manifests exist, rerun the current-head coverage-evidence job, and approve only after it reports success with required evidence or explicit no-source not-applicable evidence.

• Regression test: Keep the approval branch checking needs.coverage-evidence.result == success before posting APPROVE, and publish REQUEST_CHANGES when coverage-evidence blocker states such as cancelled, skipped, failed, unsupported-tooling, or below-100 evidence are present.

• Result: REQUEST_CHANGES

• Reason: coverage-evidence result was failure, so required test/docstring evidence was not proven for current head f87c0fbdca3b69af444a617412e3d620171b2ee4.

• Head SHA: f87c0fbdca3b69af444a617412e3d620171b2ee4

• Workflow run: 32193263753

• Workflow attempt: 1

Coverage evidence

Coverage evidence job did not run or did not publish coverage evidence.

Changed-File Evidence Map

flowchart LR
  PR["PR changed files"] --> Evidence["OpenCode bounded evidence"]
  Evidence --> S1["Changed file (2 files)"]
  S1 --> I1["repository behavior"]
  I1 --> R1["Review risk: Changed file (2 files)"]
  R1 --> V1["required checks"]

Loading

[seonghobae]

Current exact head f87c0fbdca3b69af444a617412e3d620171b2ee4 is not ready to integrate. The v64 dependency graph itself declares node: ^22.22.2 || >=24.15.0 (including @es-joy/jsdoccomment), while protected develop still advertises/supports root Node >=22.13 <23 and CLAUDE.md documents the same floor. CI is green only because its runner is already pinned to Node 22.22.3; that does not prove the repository's declared 22.13–22.22.1 compatibility. This is a branch-introduced compatibility-contract gap, not the inherited #783 security baseline or central coverage tooling.

Canonical ownership already exists in #896 (build(node): coordinate Node 22.22.2 floor with jsdom 30), which raises the root floor to >=22.22.2 <23 and adds an exact-floor compatibility lane. Do not duplicate or hand-edit that generator-sensitive lock/toolchain authority here. Rebase/recreate this update only after #896 (itself ordered after #783) establishes the new protected-base Node contract, then require fresh exact-head install/lint/test/build evidence on Node 22.22.2. Until then this major dev-dependency bump is incompatible with the live protected-base support contract.