fix(validate): salsa path evaluates status-gate validation-rules (REQ-146, #355)

[avrabe]

Addresses #355 Finding 3 ("rivet validate and rivet check gaps-json disagree").

Root cause (verified)

rivet validate runs the incremental salsa path (db::validate_all), which evaluated structural rules (phases 1-7) and conditional rules (phase 8) — but never evaluated the status-gate validation-rules (phase 9: the (implies …) V-model promotion gates). The direct validate::validate* path — used by rivet check gaps-json and rivet validate --direct — did. So the default rivet validate silently PASSED a project with a status-gate violation that gaps-json / --direct FAILED. That's both the reported cross-command disagreement and a soundness gap (the default surface under-reports).

Reproduction (local)

A project on common + aspice with an approved sys-verification that verifies a draft system-req (violates V-sys-verification-needs-approved-req):

command	before
rivet validate (salsa)	FAIL (1 error) — gate missing
rivet validate --direct	FAIL (2 errors) — gate present

After the fix both report 2 errors including the gate.

Fix

db::validate_all and db::validate_all_with_extras now call validate::evaluate_validation_rules against the same materialized store/schema/graph they already build, so structural + conditional + status-gate rules are all evaluated on every surface.

Verification

• rivet's own corpus: rivet validate and --direct both PASS, unchanged.
• New regression test db::tests::validation_rules_evaluated_in_validate_all (salsa path surfaces the gate).
• rivet-core db (24) + validation_rule (3) tests pass; clippy --all-targets + fmt clean; rivet validate + rivet docs check PASS.

Note: this is the engine-parity half of #355. Findings 1-2 (no canonical status enum; the gate hardcoding literal approved with no ordered lifecycle) remain a maintainer design decision and are untouched here.

Fixes: REQ-146

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

[github-actions]

📐 Rivet artifact delta

Change	Count
Added	1
Removed	0
Modified	0
Downstream impacted (depth ≤ 5)	0

Graph

graph LR
  REQ_146["REQ-146"]:::added
  classDef added fill:#d4edda,stroke:#28a745,color:#155724
  classDef removed fill:#f8d7da,stroke:#dc3545,color:#721c24
  classDef modified fill:#fff3cd,stroke:#ffc107,color:#856404
  classDef overflow fill:#e2e3e5,stroke:#6c757d,color:#495057,stroke-dasharray: 3 3

Loading

Added

• REQ-146

📎 Full HTML dashboard attached as workflow artifact rivet-delta-pr-393 — download from the workflow run.

_{Posted by rivet-delta workflow. The graph shows only changed artifacts; open the HTML dashboard (above) for full context.}

[github-actions]

⚠️ Performance Alert ⚠️

Possible performance regression was detected for benchmark 'Rivet Criterion Benchmarks'.
Benchmark result of this commit is worse than the previous benchmark result exceeding threshold 1.20.

Benchmark suite	Current: 7849e7c	Previous: a37bda6	Ratio
store_insert/10000	15794735 ns/iter (± 1499225)	12398686 ns/iter (± 372468)	1.27
link_graph_build/10000	35848484 ns/iter (± 4597669)	24086899 ns/iter (± 1136601)	1.49
validate/10000	16103470 ns/iter (± 2506107)	12815374 ns/iter (± 582007)	1.26

This comment was automatically generated by workflow using github-action-benchmark.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 98.57143% with 1 line in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
rivet-core/src/db.rs	98.46%	1 Missing ⚠️

📢 Thoughts on this report? Let us know!