The Fair Housing check catches 'not suitable for children' and 'couples welcome', and a phrase table proves what it catches and what it clears #33

The Fair Housing check now flags "not suitable for children" and "couples welcome". A new phrase table in src/fairhousing.test.ts proves what it flags and what it clears. The new tests, sample.test.ts, deps.test.ts, generate.test.ts and walkthrough.test.ts pass. I did not run the whole suite; the forge's check does that on this push. The first push was rejected by a forge hook relay error and went through when I retried.

What changed

• "Not suitable for children" and variants: a new risk rule in src/fairhousing.ts, touching familial status. It catches "not suitable for children", "unsuitable for kids", "not for children", "not ideal for young families" and "not recommended for toddlers". It reads "states a preference against households with children; say 'describe the property: …'". The existing "no children" and "adults only" rule already caught the other variants.
• "Couples welcome" and similar: a second new risk rule covers "couples welcome", "singles only", "professionals preferred", "childless" and "no families". "Perfect for couples" was already caught by the existing perfect-for rule, so I left it alone.
• No dropIn on either rule: no phrase can stand in the place of "not suitable for children", so both are advice-only. A test asserts this.
• Table test: it lists 24 phrases that must flag, each with the class it touches. It also lists 13 that must stay clear, including every case named in the issue. The new flags fail on main.
• README: the Fair Housing paragraph now names "not suitable for children" and "couples welcome".

Not done, on purpose

• "Senior living" and "55+ community": I left them clear rather than adding a note, so no new rule fires on them. There is a test for it. The old "no kids" reason still says "unless a qualified 55+ community".
• src/generate.ts: untouched, since #29 is in flight there.
• bun x tsc --noEmit: it printed only its help text, so I could not use it. The repo has no tsconfig.json, and bun install found nothing to install.
• Samples: I did not run src/sample.test.ts against the old rules to compare; it passes with the new ones. The new patterns only add matches on those phrases.

To try it: bun test src/fairhousing.test.ts, or launch a listing whose text contains "Couples welcome."

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

Closes #31

The Fair Housing check now flags "not suitable for children" and "couples welcome". A new phrase table in src/fairhousing.test.ts proves what it flags and what it clears. The new tests, sample.test.ts, deps.test.ts, generate.test.ts and walkthrough.test.ts pass. I did not run the whole suite; the forge's check does that on this push. The first push was rejected by a forge hook relay error and went through when I retried.

What changed

• "Not suitable for children" and variants: a new risk rule in src/fairhousing.ts, touching familial status. It catches "not suitable for children", "unsuitable for kids", "not for children", "not ideal for young families" and "not recommended for toddlers". It reads "states a preference against households with children; say 'describe the property: …'". The existing "no children" and "adults only" rule already caught the other variants.
• "Couples welcome" and similar: a second new risk rule covers "couples welcome", "singles only", "professionals preferred", "childless" and "no families". "Perfect for couples" was already caught by the existing perfect-for rule, so I left it alone.
• No dropIn on either rule: no phrase can stand in the place of "not suitable for children", so both are advice-only. A test asserts this.
• Table test: it lists 24 phrases that must flag, each with the class it touches. It also lists 13 that must stay clear, including every case named in the issue. The new flags fail on main.
• README: the Fair Housing paragraph now names "not suitable for children" and "couples welcome".

Not done, on purpose

• "Senior living" and "55+ community": I left them clear rather than adding a note, so no new rule fires on them. There is a test for it. The old "no kids" reason still says "unless a qualified 55+ community".
• src/generate.ts: untouched, since #29 is in flight there.
• bun x tsc --noEmit: it printed only its help text, so I could not use it. The repo has no tsconfig.json, and bun install found nothing to install.
• Samples: I did not run src/sample.test.ts against the old rules to compare; it passes with the new ones. The new patterns only add matches on those phrases.

To try it: bun test src/fairhousing.test.ts, or launch a listing whose text contains "Couples welcome."

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

The Fair Housing phrase table now states the expected level for each phrase, so the level check can fail (sentinel's Medium on src/fairhousing.test.ts:126).

• Table: each entry is now [text, touches, level]. All 24 phrases are "risk" except "Handicapped accessible.", which is "note". I took these from the rules' actual output rather than guessing.
• Assertion: it compares f?.level against the level in the table. The old f?.level === "note" ? "note" : "risk" expression is gone. A rule that dropped from risk to note, or a flag that is only a note, now fails.
• Scope: only the test file changed. The rules, README and behaviour are as before.

Checks: bun test src/fairhousing.test.ts passes (8 tests). bun x tsc --noEmit could not run, because the repo has no tsconfig.json and bun x fetched a bare TypeScript 7 that only printed its help text. scripts/gate.ts and scripts/fast.ts don't exist in this clone.