fix(native): retain partial format facts and explicit coverage

Preserve XML and Interface Builder identity at their parsing boundary, retain usable Objective-C slots with precise coverage, and keep native trace failures distinct from absence. Add caller-selected Interface Builder summaries backed by complete retained Evidence, and preserve comparison limitations.

Reviewed fixes: #1969, #2088, #2108, #2513, #2639, #2684, #2731, #2759, #2875, #2888, #2889, #2970, #2971, #3002.

Validation: relevant native/domain focused lane passed 142 tests; earlier Interface Builder/MCP checks passed 24 tests. Real native UI and Ghidra producer coverage was not repeated.

src/domain/functionCallCoverage.test.ts

@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@ import { describe, expect, it } from "vitest";
 
 import {
   combineFunctionRelationshipCoverage,
-  isCallerOnlyUnknownCoverage,
+  isCallerOnlyIncompleteCoverage,
 } from "./functionCallCoverage.js";
 import type { RelationshipCoverage } from "./relationshipCoverage.js";
 
@@ -22,14 +22,14 @@ const cappedCallees: RelationshipCoverage = {
 };
 const complete: RelationshipCoverage = { status: "complete" };
 
-describe("isCallerOnlyUnknownCoverage", () => {
+describe("isCallerOnlyIncompleteCoverage", () => {
   it("detects unknown callers beside complete callees", () => {
     const combined = combineFunctionRelationshipCoverage(
       unknownCallers,
       complete,
     );
     expect(combined.status).toBe("unknown");
-    expect(isCallerOnlyUnknownCoverage(combined)).toBe(true);
+    expect(isCallerOnlyIncompleteCoverage(combined)).toBe(true);
   });
 
   it("rejects unknown callees beside complete callers", () => {
@@ -37,7 +37,7 @@ describe("isCallerOnlyUnknownCoverage", () => {
       complete,
       unknownCallees,
     );
-    expect(isCallerOnlyUnknownCoverage(combined)).toBe(false);
+    expect(isCallerOnlyIncompleteCoverage(combined)).toBe(false);
   });
 
   it("rejects unknown coverage on both sides", () => {
@@ -45,7 +45,7 @@ describe("isCallerOnlyUnknownCoverage", () => {
       unknownCallers,
       unknownCallees,
     );
-    expect(isCallerOnlyUnknownCoverage(combined)).toBe(false);
+    expect(isCallerOnlyIncompleteCoverage(combined)).toBe(false);
   });
 
   it("rejects unknown callers beside IDA-capped callees", () => {
@@ -54,11 +54,37 @@ describe("isCallerOnlyUnknownCoverage", () => {
       cappedCallees,
     );
     expect(combined.status).toBe("unknown");
-    expect(isCallerOnlyUnknownCoverage(combined)).toBe(false);
+    expect(isCallerOnlyIncompleteCoverage(combined)).toBe(false);
   });
 
   it("rejects complete coverage", () => {
     const combined = combineFunctionRelationshipCoverage(complete, complete);
-    expect(isCallerOnlyUnknownCoverage(combined)).toBe(false);
+    expect(isCallerOnlyIncompleteCoverage(combined)).toBe(false);
+  });
+
+  it("retains caller-only partial coverage without relying on limitation wording", () => {
+    const combined = combineFunctionRelationshipCoverage(
+      { status: "partial", limitations: ["Missing incoming references."] },
+      complete,
+    );
+    expect(combined).toMatchObject({ limited_directions: ["callers"] });
+    expect(isCallerOnlyIncompleteCoverage(combined)).toBe(true);
+  });
+
+  it("uses explicit directions even when explanation text contains direction labels", () => {
+    expect(
+      isCallerOnlyIncompleteCoverage({
+        status: "unknown",
+        reason: "Callers: unavailable. Callees: diagnostic text.",
+        limited_directions: ["callers"],
+      }),
+    ).toBe(true);
+    expect(
+      isCallerOnlyIncompleteCoverage({
+        status: "unknown",
+        reason: "Callers: unavailable.",
+        limited_directions: ["callees"],
+      }),
+    ).toBe(false);
   });
 });