docs(tunit): close out PLAN-0040 (Phase 3 docs/skill consistency pass)

docs/packages/compono-tunit.md

@@ -21,7 +21,7 @@ composer's own `Create<T>()`).
 
 ## What it gives you (today)
 
-PLAN-0040 Phase 0/1 have shipped — see
+The full attribute family has shipped — see
 [ADR-0040](../adr/0040-compono-tunit-package-design.md) for the full design
 and [PLAN-0040](../plans/0040-compono-tunit-package-design.md) for phase
 status.

docs/packages/index.md

@@ -10,7 +10,7 @@ need the first two.
 | [`Compono.XunitV3`](compono-xunitv3.md) | `[Compose]`/`[Compose<TProfile>]`/`[Compose<TProfile, TConfig>]` theory data attributes and `[Shared]` parameter sharing for xUnit v3. | You write xUnit v3 tests and want composed theory parameters instead of hand-built test data. |
 | [`Compono.NSubstitute`](compono-nsubstitute.md) | Automatic substitute composition for interface, delegate, and (optionally) abstract-class parameters. | Your composed types depend on interfaces you'd otherwise stub by hand with NSubstitute. |
 | [`Compono.Bogus`](compono-bogus.md) | Realistic fake data — member-name-convention matching plus explicit `Faker<T>` sugar. | You want `FullName`/`Email`/`StreetAddress`-shaped fields to look like real data instead of anonymous strings. |
-| [`Compono.TUnit`](compono-tunit.md) | `[Compose]` data source attribute and `[Shared]` parameter sharing for TUnit. | You write TUnit tests and want composed method parameters instead of hand-built data sources. |
+| [`Compono.TUnit`](compono-tunit.md) | `[Compose]`/`[Compose<TProfile>]`/`[Compose<TProfile, TConfig>]` data source attributes and `[Shared]` parameter sharing for TUnit. | You write TUnit tests and want composed method parameters instead of hand-built data sources. |
 
 Every package targets `net8.0`/`net9.0`/`net10.0`/`net11.0` and, until the
 first stable `1.0` release, publishes as a `0.x.y-preview.N` prerelease —

docs/plans/0040-compono-tunit-package-design.md

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 # [PLAN-0040] Compono.TUnit Package Design
 
-**Status:** In Progress
+**Status:** Done
 
 **Implements:** [ADR-0040](../adr/0040-compono-tunit-package-design.md)
 (`Compono.TUnit` package: method-parameter composition only, no new
@@ -543,23 +543,43 @@ Each phase ships as its own PR, per `design-decisions.md`'s phase rule.
 
 ### Phase 3: Docs and skill consistency close-out
 
-**Status:** Not Started
+**Status:** Done
 
-- [ ] Re-read `docs/packages/compono-tunit.md`, `docs/packages/index.md`,
+- [x] Re-read `docs/packages/compono-tunit.md`, `docs/packages/index.md`,
       `skills/compono/references/tunit.md`, and `SKILL.md`'s Detection
       table/guardrail/description end to end — confirm nothing Phase 0/1
       added is inconsistent or stale now that the full package exists (a
       pure consistency pass; Phase 0/1 already did the substantive writing
-      per-behavior).
-- [ ] `docs/roadmap/future-packages.md`: move `Compono.TUnit` out of
-      "Roadmap items" — it's shipped, not a roadmap item anymore.
-- [ ] `skills/compono-evals/evals.json`: retire or rewrite eval scenario
-      20 (`Does Compono support NUnit?` — currently uses `Compono.TUnit`
-      as an example of a package that doesn't exist; check it doesn't
-      accidentally still assert that once `Compono.TUnit` ships) and add a
-      routing scenario confirming the skill only recommends
-      `Compono.TUnit` guidance when that package is referenced, matching
-      the existing NSubstitute/Bogus routing scenarios' shape.
+      per-behavior). Found and fixed four stale spots, all pre-dating
+      Phase 1/2 shipping: `compono-tunit.md`'s and `tunit.md`'s own
+      "PLAN-0040 Phase 0/1 have shipped" intro lines (now describe the
+      full family, not a phase number); `docs/packages/index.md`'s
+      `Compono.TUnit` row (still said "`[Compose]` data source attribute
+      ... " only, no profile variants, unlike the `Compono.XunitV3` row
+      immediately above it); `SKILL.md`'s Detection table row, its "Never
+      claim or write code against..." guardrail, and its
+      `references/tunit.md` file-index row (all three still said
+      `Compono.TUnit` ships only `[Compose]`/`[Shared]`, "not
+      `[Compose<TProfile>]` yet" — stale since Phase 1 merged).
+- [x] `docs/roadmap/future-packages.md`: moved `Compono.TUnit` out of
+      "Roadmap items" — it's shipped, not a roadmap item anymore. Reworded
+      the intro (five shipped packages, not four-plus-one-committed), the
+      Admission model section's `Compono.TUnit` paragraph (now describes
+      the full admitted-candidate → roadmap-item → committed →
+      **shipped-package** progression, past tense), and emptied the
+      "Roadmap items" section itself with a pointer to
+      [Package Guides](../packages/index.md).
+- [x] `skills/compono-evals/evals.json`: eval 20 (`Does Compono support
+      NUnit?`) was checked directly — it's about `Compono.NUnit`, not
+      `Compono.TUnit`, and doesn't use `Compono.TUnit` as an example of a
+      nonexistent package (that concern must have been addressed earlier
+      than this phase; nothing to retire/rewrite there). Added eval 21 (a
+      new `routing` scenario): a project referencing `Compono`,
+      `Compono.TUnit`, and `Compono.NSubstitute` but *not*
+      `Compono.XunitV3`, expecting TUnit's own `[Test]`/`[Compose<TProfile>]`
+      shape (not xUnit v3's `[Theory]`) with `UseNSubstitute()`/`[Shared]`
+      — mirrors eval 3's (`Compono.NSubstitute` routing) and eval 18's
+      (negative-routing: a package NOT referenced) shape.
 
 ## Critical Files
 
@@ -940,3 +960,22 @@ No doc updates in this phase - Phase 3 is the docs/skill closing
 consistency pass, not this one.
 
 Phase 2 is complete - every task checked off.
+
+**Phase 3 implementation (2026-08-12)**: PR #79 (Phase 2) merged to `main`
+first, per this plan's own phase-PR rule. A pure consistency pass, no
+`src/Compono.TUnit` code changes - four stale-doc spots found by direct
+rereading (not assumed), all pre-dating Phase 1/2's own shipping, listed
+in Phase 3's own task checkboxes above. `docs/roadmap/future-packages.md`
+got the larger rewrite the plan's task called for: `Compono.TUnit` moved
+from "committed implementation work" language to past-tense "shipped
+package" language throughout (intro, Admission model section, and the
+"Roadmap items" section itself, now empty with a pointer to Package
+Guides) - the five-package count (not four-plus-one) now matches
+`docs/packages/index.md`'s own count exactly. `skills/compono-evals
+/evals.json` eval 20 turned out already correct (it's an NUnit scenario,
+not a TUnit one - the plan's own premise for that half of the task was
+stale by the time this phase ran); added eval 21, a `Compono.TUnit` +
+`Compono.NSubstitute`-without-`Compono.XunitV3` routing scenario.
+
+Phase 3 is complete - every task checked off. **PLAN-0040 is complete -
+all four phases done, `Compono.TUnit` is a shipped package.**

docs/plans/README.md

@@ -56,5 +56,5 @@ one. This file is just the mechanics: numbering, status, and the index.
 | [0037](0037-netstandard2.1-compatibility-floor.md) | netstandard2.1 Compatibility Floor | Superseded by PLAN-0038 |
 | [0038](0038-net8-net9-explicit-multi-target.md) | net8.0/net9.0 Explicit Multi-Target | Done |
 | [0039](0039-future-extension-package-admission-gate-and-release-sequence.md) | Future Extension Package Admission Gate and Release Sequence | Done |
-| [0040](0040-compono-tunit-package-design.md) | Compono.TUnit Package Design | In Progress |
+| [0040](0040-compono-tunit-package-design.md) | Compono.TUnit Package Design | Done |
 | [0041](0041-aot-safe-row-binding-dispatch.md) | AOT-Safe Row-Binding Dispatch | Done |

docs/roadmap/future-packages.md

@@ -1,20 +1,18 @@
 # Future Packages
 
-Compono's MVP package set is fully shipped (see
-[Package Guides](../packages/index.md)): four independently installable
-packages — `Compono`, `Compono.XunitV3`, `Compono.NSubstitute`, and
-`Compono.Bogus` — plus `Compono.Generators`, which is not a fifth
-installable package at all. It's `IsPackable=false`
+Compono's shipped package set (see [Package Guides](../packages/index.md))
+is five independently installable packages — `Compono`, `Compono.XunitV3`,
+`Compono.NSubstitute`, `Compono.Bogus`, and `Compono.TUnit` — plus
+`Compono.Generators`, which is not a sixth installable package at all. It's
+`IsPackable=false`
 ([ADR-0003](../adr/0003-generator-package-distribution.md)) and ships
 embedded inside `Compono`'s own `.nupkg` as an analyzer
-(`analyzers/dotnet/cs`) — a consumer never references it directly, and
-it never appears on nuget.org on its own. One additional package —
-`Compono.TUnit` — is committed via an `Accepted` ADR
-([ADR-0040](../adr/0040-compono-tunit-package-design.md)), with
-[PLAN-0040](../plans/0040-compono-tunit-package-design.md) (`In Progress`)
-tracking its implementation; see
-[Roadmap items](#roadmap-items-cleared-gate-a-and-gate-b) below. No other
-candidate on this page has cleared both gates yet.
+(`analyzers/dotnet/cs`) — a consumer never references it directly, and it
+never appears on nuget.org on its own. `Compono.TUnit` graduated from this
+page's roadmap once [PLAN-0040](../plans/0040-compono-tunit-package-design.md)
+completed all its phases — see
+[`Compono.TUnit`](../packages/compono-tunit.md) for what it ships. No
+candidate on this page has cleared both admission gates yet.
 
 ## Admission model
 
@@ -34,32 +32,19 @@ item becomes **committed implementation work** only once that ADR itself
 reaches `Accepted` (its own full design pass, not just the problem
 statement) and a `Plan` moves `In Progress` against it — the same
 ADR/Plan mechanics every other change in this repo goes through, per
-`docs/adr/README.md`/`docs/plans/README.md`. `Compono.TUnit` (below) is
-the one candidate that has reached **roadmap item** status and, as of
-[PLAN-0040](../plans/0040-compono-tunit-package-design.md) moving
-`In Progress`, committed implementation work too; nothing besides
-`Compono.TUnit` is roadmap content at all.
+`docs/adr/README.md`/`docs/plans/README.md`. `Compono.TUnit` made that full
+progression — admitted candidate, roadmap item, committed implementation
+work, and finally a shipped package once
+[PLAN-0040](../plans/0040-compono-tunit-package-design.md) completed — and
+is documented as a [Package Guide](../packages/compono-tunit.md) now, not
+roadmap content; nothing on this page has reached roadmap-item status
+since.
 
 ## Roadmap items (cleared Gate A and Gate B)
 
-- **`Compono.TUnit`** — cleared Gate A on TUnit's `IDataSourceAttribute`
-  family (especially `UntypedDataSourceGeneratorAttribute`, which TUnit's
-  own docs cite AutoFixture-shaped libraries as the motivating case for),
-  its per-row `TestBuilderContext`, and its combinatorial interplay with
-  `[Arguments]` — a real integration surface following `Compono.XunitV3`'s
-  `CompositionRow`-based model
-  ([ADR-0021](../adr/0021-row-composition-entry-point-for-test-framework-integrations.md)).
-  Cleared Gate A on that surface specifically, not because TUnit is
-  source-generated — that architectural kinship is not, on its own,
-  consumer value; see ADR-0039 for what was retired and why. Cleared
-  Gate B via an explicit product-owner request (ADR-0039's real-demand
-  trigger). [ADR-0040](../adr/0040-compono-tunit-package-design.md)
-  (`Accepted`) records the resulting package design — method-parameter
-  composition only for the first release, full parity with
-  `Compono.XunitV3`'s scope; see that ADR for why constructor-dependency
-  composition was investigated and deferred.
-  [PLAN-0040](../plans/0040-compono-tunit-package-design.md) tracks
-  implementation, phase by phase.
+None currently. `Compono.TUnit` was the one candidate to reach this
+status — see the Admission model note above; it shipped as a package and
+moved to [Package Guides](../packages/index.md).
 
 ## Admitted candidates (cleared Gate A, no evidence yet)
 

skills/compono-evals/evals.json

@@ -227,6 +227,19 @@
         "Correctly distinguishes 'not shipped' from 'impossible' \u2014 core Compono usable directly in any test framework via Composer.Create<T>()",
         "Does not silently redirect to Compono.XunitV3 as if it worked in NUnit"
       ]
+    },
+    {
+      "id": 21,
+      "category": "routing",
+      "prompt": "Write a TUnit test that composes an OrderService and reuses a mocked IOrderRepository across the composed graph, applying an NSubstitute profile. The project references Compono, Compono.TUnit, and Compono.NSubstitute - not Compono.XunitV3.",
+      "expected_output": "Uses TUnit's own [Test]/[Compose<TProfile>] shape (not xUnit v3's [Theory]/ClassData), with a profile calling UseNSubstitute() and [Shared] on the substitute parameter - because Compono.TUnit and Compono.NSubstitute are referenced, not Compono.XunitV3.",
+      "files": [],
+      "expectations": [
+        "Uses [Test] + [Compose<TProfile>] (TUnit's own attributes), not [Theory]/xUnit v3 syntax, since Compono.XunitV3 isn't referenced",
+        "Applies UseNSubstitute() from a profile since Compono.NSubstitute is referenced",
+        "Uses [Shared] only on the substitute parameter that needs to be asserted against",
+        "Does not mix Compono.XunitV3-only constructs (e.g. [Theory]) into a TUnit test"
+      ]
     }
   ]
-}
+}

skills/compono/SKILL.md

@@ -43,7 +43,7 @@ some packages and not others.
 |---|---|---|---|
 | `<PackageReference Include="Compono"` | any `.csproj` in the project | Definitive | Core Compono in use |
 | `<PackageReference Include="Compono.XunitV3"` | `.csproj` | Definitive | `[Compose]`/`[Compose<TProfile>]`/`[Compose<TProfile, TConfig>]`/`[Shared]` available — load `references/xunit-v3.md` |
-| `<PackageReference Include="Compono.TUnit"` | `.csproj` | Definitive | `[Compose]`/`[Shared]` available (method-parameter composition only so far - no `[Compose<TProfile>]` yet) — load `references/tunit.md` |
+| `<PackageReference Include="Compono.TUnit"` | `.csproj` | Definitive | `[Compose]`/`[Compose<TProfile>]`/`[Compose<TProfile, TConfig>]`/`[Shared]` available — load `references/tunit.md` |
 | `<PackageReference Include="Compono.NSubstitute"` | `.csproj` | Definitive | `UseNSubstitute()` available — load `references/nsubstitute.md` |
 | `<PackageReference Include="Compono.Bogus"` | `.csproj` | Definitive | `UseBogus()`/`UseBogus<T>()` available — load `references/bogus.md` |
 | `Composer.Create(`, `.Create<`, `.CreateMany<`, `CompositionBuilder` | `*.cs` | High | Core Compono API in active use |
@@ -99,9 +99,10 @@ user to make test-by-test, not something to do as a drive-by.
      not a copy-pasted builder lambda in every test.
    - A value only known at a *specific test's call site* that must
      influence configuration logic running *inside* a profile (not a
-     top-level test parameter) → `Compono.XunitV3`'s
-     `[Compose<TProfile, TConfig>]`, if that package is referenced — see
-     `references/xunit-v3.md`. Prefer an enum/`typeof(...)` over a bare
+     top-level test parameter) → `[Compose<TProfile, TConfig>]` (in
+     `Compono.XunitV3` or `Compono.TUnit`, whichever the project
+     references) — see `references/xunit-v3.md` or `references/tunit.md`
+     to match. Prefer an enum/`typeof(...)` over a bare
      string for the argument. Don't confuse this with a
      `CompositionProviderRequest.Name`-based custom provider
      (`references/registrations-profiles-and-scopes.md`), which solves a
@@ -185,9 +186,9 @@ undermines the reason Compono exists in this project.
   hasn't shipped — but distinguish "no dedicated package" from "no
   capability."** Only `Compono`, `Compono.XunitV3`, `Compono.TUnit`,
   `Compono.NSubstitute`, and `Compono.Bogus` ship as packages today
-  (`Compono.TUnit` ships only `[Compose]`/`[Shared]` method-parameter
-  composition so far, not `[Compose<TProfile>]`/`[Compose<TProfile, TConfig>]`
-  — see `references/tunit.md`) — there is no `Compono.NUnit`,
+  (`Compono.TUnit` ships the full attribute family —
+  `[Compose]`/`[Compose<TProfile>]`/`[Compose<TProfile, TConfig>]`/`[Shared]`,
+  see `references/tunit.md`) — there is no `Compono.NUnit`,
   `Compono.MSTest`, `Compono.FakeItEasy`, `Compono.Moq`, or
   `Compono.DependencyInjection`, and never invent a plausible-looking API
   for one. That doesn't always mean the underlying capability is
@@ -248,7 +249,7 @@ Load only what the Detection table says is relevant to the current task.
 | `references/registrations-profiles-and-scopes.md` | Using `Register<T>()`, `.For<T>().Use()`/`.Member()`, `ICompositionProfile`, `[Shared]`, or debugging a recursion/registration-conflict error |
 | `references/diagnostics.md` | A `CMP0001`-`CMP0012` build error, or a runtime `CompositionException` needs diagnosing |
 | `references/xunit-v3.md` | `Compono.XunitV3` is referenced — `[Compose]`/`[Compose<TProfile>]`/`[Compose<TProfile, TConfig>]`/`[Shared]` theory work |
-| `references/tunit.md` | `Compono.TUnit` is referenced — `[Compose]`/`[Shared]` test-method work |
+| `references/tunit.md` | `Compono.TUnit` is referenced — `[Compose]`/`[Compose<TProfile>]`/`[Compose<TProfile, TConfig>]`/`[Shared]` test-method work |
 | `references/nsubstitute.md` | `Compono.NSubstitute` is referenced — `UseNSubstitute()` work |
 | `references/bogus.md` | `Compono.Bogus` is referenced — `UseBogus()`/`UseBogus<T>()` work |
 | `references/patterns-and-antipatterns.md` | Reviewing existing Compono usage for correctness, migrating from AutoFixture, or unsure whether an approach is idiomatic |

skills/compono/references/tunit.md

@@ -4,9 +4,9 @@ Only relevant if the project references `Compono.TUnit`. Requires real
 TUnit (`TUnit`/`TUnit.Core` + Microsoft Testing Platform runner). Depends
 on `Compono` (the source generator flows through transitively).
 
-PLAN-0040 Phase 0/1 have shipped: `[Compose]`, `[Compose<TProfile>]`, and
-`[Compose<TProfile, TConfig>]`, method-parameter-only — see ADR-0040 for
-the full design.
+The full attribute family has shipped: `[Compose]`, `[Compose<TProfile>]`,
+and `[Compose<TProfile, TConfig>]`, method-parameter-only — see ADR-0040
+for the full design.
 
 ## `[Compose]`