chore: enable RUF002/RUF003 (ambiguous Unicode characters)

[sergio-sisternes-epam]

Context

PR #999 deferred RUF002 (ambiguous characters in docstrings, 8 violations) and RUF003 (ambiguous characters in comments, 14 violations) to avoid scope creep. These rules align with the repo's cross-platform ASCII encoding convention (.github/instructions/encoding.instructions.md).

Task

1. Remove "RUF002" and "RUF003" from the ignore list in pyproject.toml
2. Fix the 22 violations -- most are curly quotes or non-ASCII dashes that crept into docstrings/comments
3. Run uv run ruff check src/ tests/ to confirm clean
4. Verify no legitimate Unicode content is broken (e.g., user-facing strings with internationalised text)

Current violations

# To reproduce:
uv run ruff check --select RUF002,RUF003 src/ tests/

References

• Parent PR: feat: add Ruff code quality guardrails (replaces black + isort) #999
• Encoding convention: .github/instructions/encoding.instructions.md

[github-actions]

Triage decision

accept

Proposed labels

area/ci-cd
area/testing
type/refactor
status/accepted
priority/low

Milestone

0.10.0

Suggested next action

Open a PR that removes "RUF002" and "RUF003" from the ignore list in pyproject.toml, fixes the 22 violations, and confirms a clean uv run ruff check src/ tests/ run.

Suggested issue comment

Thanks for the well-scoped follow-up to #999! Enabling RUF002 and RUF003 directly enforces our cross-platform ASCII encoding convention in an automated way, which is exactly the right move.

Accepting this for 0.10.0. The steps in the issue body are the complete spec:

1. Remove `"RUF002"` and `"RUF003"` from the `ignore` list in `pyproject.toml`.
2. Fix the 22 violations (curly quotes, non-ASCII dashes in docstrings/comments).
3. Confirm `uv run ruff check src/ tests/` exits clean.
4. Double-check that no legitimate internationalised user-facing strings are caught (they should not be, since these rules only cover docstrings and comments, not string literals).

If you'd like to take this on, a PR is welcome. The encoding convention doc at `.github/instructions/encoding.instructions.md` is the authoritative reference if you need to judge any edge case.

Per-lens notes (collapsed)

DevX UX Expert -- User-Need Reviewer

The request maps cleanly to a contributor toolchain surface every developer touches: docstrings and inline comments. RUF002/RUF003 automate the encoding convention already codified in .github/instructions/encoding.instructions.md. PR #999 deferred these rules explicitly to avoid scope creep, making this a tracked follow-up with no ambiguity. The issue supplies exact reproduction steps, a violation count (22), and a clear acceptance criterion (clean ruff output). No CLI UX surface change; purely a contributor quality-gate improvement. Framing is aligned with the automated-quality-gate mental model that npm/pip/cargo contributors expect.

Supply Chain Security Expert -- Risk-Surface Reviewer

No risk-surface implication. RUF002/RUF003 operate on docstrings and comments only, not on executable code paths, lockfiles, MCP config trust boundaries, or authentication flows. Enabling them strictly reduces risk by preventing non-ASCII characters (potential homoglyph vectors) from entering reviewed source. No theme/security or theme/governance required; no security-domain area/* labels apply.

OSS Growth Hacker -- Contributor-Tone Reviewer

Not activated -- author is a COLLABORATOR with established familiarity with the project; no tone-tuning for a first-time contributor is needed.

Python Architect -- Architecture Reviewer

Not activated -- issue requires no cross-cutting design decision; the implementation is fully mechanical (edit pyproject.toml, fix 22 character violations, run ruff).

Doc Writer -- Documentation Reviewer

Not activated -- no user-facing feature or documentation surface change is implied by enabling two linting rules in pyproject.toml.

APM CEO -- Triage Arbiter

Clean accept. This is well-scoped tech debt filed by a COLLABORATOR who provided a complete spec. Both specialist lenses agree: real contributor-facing quality improvement, zero risk-surface implication. The issue is entirely infra-domain (linting config plus a mechanical source fix), so the theme/* label exemption applies -- no mega-theme label required. Milestone is 0.10.0, the active development bucket after 0.9.4 released 2026-04-26. Priority is low: the repo functions without this, but the fix removes a class of manual review burden permanently.

{
  "decision": "accept",
  "decision_detail": "",
  "theme": null,
  "areas": ["area/ci-cd", "area/testing"],
  "type": "type/refactor",
  "status": "status/accepted",
  "priority": "priority/low",
  "preserved_labels": [],
  "milestone": "0.10.0",
  "next_action": "Open a PR that removes RUF002 and RUF003 from the ignore list in pyproject.toml, fixes the 22 violations, and confirms a clean uv run ruff check src/ tests/ run.",
  "comment_markdown": "Thanks for the well-scoped follow-up to #999! Enabling RUF002 and RUF003 directly enforces our cross-platform ASCII encoding convention in an automated way, which is exactly the right move.\n\nAccepting this for 0.10.0. The steps in the issue body are the complete spec:\n\n1. Remove `\"RUF002\"` and `\"RUF003\"` from the `ignore` list in `pyproject.toml`.\n2. Fix the 22 violations (curly quotes, non-ASCII dashes in docstrings/comments).\n3. Confirm `uv run ruff check src/ tests/` exits clean.\n4. Double-check that no legitimate internationalised user-facing strings are caught (they should not be, since these rules only cover docstrings and comments, not string literals).\n\nIf you'd like to take this on, a PR is welcome. The encoding convention doc at `.github/instructions/encoding.instructions.md` is the authoritative reference if you need to judge any edge case."
}

---

Triage status: agentic proposal pending human ratification.
Silence is approval. Maintainers can:

• Override any label or milestone above by editing it directly --
  human edits are authoritative and will not be reverted on
  subsequent runs.
• Re-trigger triage by applying the status/needs-triage label, or
  by removing status/triaged to enroll the issue in the next
  daily sweep.

Posted by the Triage Panel workflow. See .apm/skills/apm-triage-panel for the panel skill.

Generated by Triage Panel for issue #1005 · ● 650K · ◷