## Verification Report

**Change**: persistence-corruption-guard
**Version**: N/A (no version field in spec; verified against spec observation #2351, design #2354, tasks #2359, apply-progress #2360, all dated 2026-07-11)
**Mode**: Strict TDD

### Completeness

| Metric | Value |
|--------|-------|
| Tasks total | 61 |
| Tasks complete | 60 |
| Tasks incomplete | 1 (D4, optional non-blocking on-device sanity check; no device/emulator available; explicitly skippable per its own task text) |

Phase A (Alarms): 23/23. Phase B (Custom Stations): 17/17. Phase C (Equalizer): 17/17. Phase D (Final Sweep): 3/4 (D4 intentionally unchecked).

Commits verified on main (pushed): 65c1ac2 (Alarms), 13ad736 (Stations), 45b7fc8 (EQ). Note: the apply-progress and tasks artifacts reference pre-push local hashes b66eec0, cbed0a6, 5e53a6c -- confirmed these are dangling objects, tree-identical to the pushed commits except a 1-line pubspec.yaml version bump each (this repos standard version-bump-on-push convention). No content discrepancy.

### Build & Tests Execution

**Build**: N/A -- flutter build intentionally not run per repo convention (known unrelated full-build/full-suite hang risk).

**Tests**: independently re-executed the exact targeted gate specified for this change.
```text
flutter test test/servicios/persistencia_tolerante_test.dart test/servicios/servicio_alarmas_cache_test.dart test/servicios/servicio_alarmas_proxima_test.dart test/servicios/servicio_alarmas_snooze_test.dart test/servicios/servicio_alarmas_corrupcion_test.dart test/estado/estado_radio_test.dart test/servicios/servicio_ecualizador_test.dart

00:02 +62: All tests passed!
```
PASS -- 62 passed / 0 failed / 0 skipped -- matches apply-progress D2 claim exactly, independently reproduced.

**Analyze**:
```text
flutter analyze
Analyzing pluriwave...
No issues found! (ran in 5.5s)
```
PASS -- 0 issues, whole-project sweep -- matches D1 claim exactly, independently reproduced.

**Coverage**: flutter test --coverage launched on the same targeted file list as a background check; did not complete within this sessions report-writing window. Not blocking -- Strict TDD treats coverage as informational only. Correctness is already established by the pass/fail run above plus direct source-diff inspection below.

### Spec Compliance Matrix

| # | Requirement | Scenario | Test | Result |
|---|-------------|----------|------|--------|
| 1.1 | Per-entry tolerant parsing preserves valid siblings | alarms -- one corrupt alarm among N | servicio_alarmas_corrupcion_test.dart > "carga parcial (2 validas + 1 con id de tipo incorrecto): recalcularTodas no reescribe en cada tick (D3, no-thrash)" | PASS |
| 1.2 | Per-entry tolerant parsing preserves valid siblings | custom stations -- one corrupt station among N | estado_radio_test.dart > "entradas invalidas se omiten sin perder las validas ni fabricar uuid (D5 parcial)" | PASS |
| 1.3 | Per-entry tolerant parsing preserves valid siblings | EQ maps -- one corrupt value among N | servicio_ecualizador_test.dart > "C2 presetsMatriz: sobrevive parcial..." plus "C6 nombresDispositivos: sobrevive parcial..." | PASS |
| 2.1 | Entry identity is never fabricated | alarms -- entry with no id, never assigned one | servicio_alarmas_corrupcion_test.dart > "entrada sin id se omite y jamas se le fabrica uno nuevo (D2)" | PASS |
| 2.2 | Entry identity is never fabricated | custom stations -- entry with no uuid, never assigned one | estado_radio_test.dart > same test as 1.2, asserts exactly custom-1/custom-2 survive out of 4 seeded entries incl. a no-uuid one | PASS |
| 3.1 | Degraded read suppresses automatic writes / restores authority | alarms -- recalcularTodas writes nothing after degraded read; explicit save restores authority | servicio_alarmas_corrupcion_test.dart > "carga totalmente corrupta... (D4)" plus "guardarAlarma tras una lectura degradada... (D4)" | PASS |
| 3.2 | Degraded read suppresses automatic writes / restores authority | custom stations -- no automatic write after degraded file; explicit add/remove restores authority | estado_radio_test.dart > "JSON invalido al nivel superior pone en cuarentena... (D5 parse-fail)" plus "agregar tras la cuarentena escribe solo la nueva emisora... (D5)" | PASS, see Note A |
| 3.3 | Degraded read suppresses automatic writes / restores authority | EQ -- no automatic write after degraded key; explicit tweak restores authority | servicio_ecualizador_test.dart > "C4 presetsDispositivo totalmente corrupto... (sin bandera en EQ)" | PASS, see Note B |
| 4.1 | Healthy reads are behaviorally unchanged | existing suites lock byte-for-byte parity | All 7 targeted files, full regression re-run | PASS (62/62, including every pre-existing case) |
| 5.1 | Diagnostics are developer-facing only | skip/degraded events logged, no l10n added | persistencia_tolerante_test.dart (2 log-assertion tests) plus servicio_ecualizador_test.dart "C5 preset principal totalmente corrupto... loguea..." plus git show --stat on all 3 commits confirms zero l10n file changes | PASS |

Compliance summary: 10/10 scenarios compliant.

Note A (3.2): The spec Requirement prose says suppression must lift on the next successful read or an explicit user mutation, whichever comes first (user intent wins). The written scenario text ("the custom-stations file is unparseable") maps to the PARSE-fail path, which is fully compliant: quarantine sets no flag, and the next explicit add/remove writes immediately. Design D5 additionally splits out an IO-fail sub-case (file exists but readAsString throws) where the customDegradado flag is deliberately not lifted by an explicit agregarEmisoraCustom/eliminarEmisoraCustom call -- only a subsequent clean/partial load clears it. This is well-reasoned (avoids clobbering a possibly-intact file) and does not contradict the written scenario, but it is a narrower reading of the Requirements general "user intent wins" principle for that one sub-case. See SUGGESTION S2 below.

Note B (3.3): EQ has no automatic writer at all, so "no automatic write occurs while degraded" is true by construction in both the old and new code -- this half of the scenario is structurally vacuous, matching Phase A own precedent (A12). The tests real value is the second half (explicit guardarPresetDispositivo after total corruption still writes and round-trips). See adjudication of checklist item 5c below.

### Correctness (Static Evidence -- verified via direct git show diff inspection of all 3 commits, not apply-progress self-report alone)

| Requirement | Status | Notes |
|------------|--------|-------|
| D1 Shared helper, already-decoded containers | Implemented | parseListaTolerante and parseMapaTolerante in lib/servicios/persistencia_tolerante.dart -- confirmed both take pre-decoded containers, never call jsonDecode themselves; per-entry try/catch; registrarSaltoPersistencia uses debugPrint with the [PluriWave][persistencia] prefix |
| D2 Caller hardens, model unchanged | Implemented | AlarmaMusical.fromJson id cast is byte-for-byte unchanged (only a doc comment added); ServicioAlarmas._parsear wraps each fromJson call inside parseListaTolerante per-entry try |
| D3 cacheRaw normalization on partial load | Implemented | cacheRaw is normalized via serializar only when at least 1 skip occurred, otherwise kept as raw; confirmed the no-thrash test independently (writes grow by at most 1 across 2 recalcularTodas ticks) |
| D4 Alarms total-fail flag and write suppression | Implemented | lecturaAlarmasDegradada set true in the catch block (top-level decode failure), cacheRaw preserved untouched; recalcularTodas checks the flag before the dirty-guard, confirmed via full-function read; guardar clears the flag on every explicit mutation |
| D5 Stations parse-vs-IO split and eager quarantine | Implemented | leerContenidoCustom isolates IO failure (flag set true, file untouched); ponerEnCuarentena handles parse failure (rename to .corrupt sidecar, or drop live copy if a sidecar already exists, no flag); guardarEmisorasCustom guarded by the flag check; confirmed agregarEmisoraCustom/eliminarEmisoraCustom are byte-for-byte unmodified, flag is NOT cleared there, deliberate asymmetry with a dedicated test |
| D6 EQ tolerant readers, no flag | Implemented | All 3 map readers delegate to parseMapaTolerante; leerPresetPrincipal gained only a logging call in its existing catch, single-value key, no structural change; confirmed via grep that zero guardarXxx/guardarConfiguracion methods reference any flag or degradation field |
| No l10n strings introduced | Confirmed | git show --stat on all 3 commits touches zero files under lib/l10n/ |

### Coherence (Design)

| Decision | Followed? | Notes |
|----------|-----------|-------|
| D1 | Yes | Shared helper matches spec exactly, incl. Dart 3.7 record return type |
| D2 | Yes | Skip-never-fabricate enforced at the caller boundary only |
| D3 | Yes | No-thrash guarantee independently verified with a real write-counting test |
| D4 | Yes | Flag ordering (before dirty-guard) and clear-on-guardar both confirmed in source |
| D5 | Yes | Parse-vs-IO split and asymmetric flag-clearing both confirmed in source and dedicated tests |
| D6 | Yes | No flag/quarantine added; confirmed via direct grep of all guardarXxx methods |

### TDD Compliance

| Check | Result | Details |
|-------|--------|---------|
| TDD Evidence reported | Partial | The apply-progress formal "TDD Cycle Evidence" table only contains a row for Phase C (final batch); Phases A/B evidence lives as detailed inline per-task RED/GREEN notes in tasks.md instead of a consolidated table, likely lost on topic_key upsert across batches. See WARNING W2. |
| All tasks have tests | Yes | Every RED task (A1-A4, A9-A14, B1-B7, C1-C7) has a corresponding test file/case, confirmed via direct diff read, not just self-report |
| RED confirmed (tests exist) | Yes | 19 new test cases confirmed present across persistencia_tolerante_test.dart (new file, 5), servicio_alarmas_corrupcion_test.dart (new file, 4), estado_radio_test.dart (+5), servicio_ecualizador_test.dart (+5) |
| GREEN confirmed (tests pass) | Yes | 62/62 independently re-executed, not just trusted from apply-progress |
| Triangulation adequate | Yes | Each behavior has 2+ distinct cases, e.g. alarms: partial/total/explicit-restore/no-fabricate; stations: partial/parse-fail/restore/IO-fail/sidecar-exists |
| Safety Net for modified files | Yes | Pre-existing suites (19 alarms, 13 stations, 20 EQ) all confirmed still green post-change, run together with new tests in the same gate |

TDD Compliance: 5/6 checks fully passed, 1 partial (documentation completeness, not a RED/GREEN discipline failure -- independently corroborated via source inspection).

### Test Layer Distribution

| Layer | Tests | Files | Tools |
|-------|-------|-------|-------|
| Unit | 62 | 7 | flutter_test, SharedPreferences.setMockInitialValues, hand-rolled implements+noSuchMethod spies (_PrefsEspia, _ArchivoEspia) |
| Integration | 0 | 0 | not applicable -- no rendering/widget-tree or HTTP involved in this change |
| E2E | 0 | 0 | not applicable |
| Total | 62 | 7 | |

Unit-only coverage is appropriate here: this change is pure persistence/parsing logic with no UI, and the existing project convention already tests this layer exclusively at the unit level.

### Assertion Quality

Scanned all 4 new/modified test files (19 new test cases) for banned patterns: tautologies, orphan-empty-without-companion, ghost loops, precondition-blocks-execution, smoke-test-only, implementation-detail coupling, mock-heavy ratio.

Assertion quality: All assertions verify real behavior. Zero CRITICAL, zero WARNING findings.

Specifically evaluated and cleared:
- Write-count assertions (escriturasString, writeAsStringCalls) are not implementation-detail coupling -- counting actual writes to the real persistence boundary (SharedPreferences.setString / File.writeAsString) is the literal, spec-mandated observable behavior under test ("system MUST NOT let any non-explicit write reach disk"), not an internal-mock-call smell.
- The one "empty result" assertion without an immediate companion in the same test (persistencia_tolerante_test.dart null-input case) has companions elsewhere in the same file/group asserting non-empty survivors -- not an orphan check.
- No mock/assertion ratio exceeds 2:1 in any file; spies are shared setup fixtures, not per-assertion mocks.

### Issues Found

CRITICAL: None.

WARNING:

W1 -- archivoCustom() path resolution left outside the IO try/catch (lib/estado/estado_radio.dart around lines 531-534). Pre-change, the single catch-all in cargarEmisorasCustom also covered archivoCustom own resolution (getApplicationDocumentsDirectory via path_provider); post-change, that call happens before leerContenidoCustom try block, so a hypothetical resolution failure is now uncaught. cargarEmisorasCustom runs inside a Future.wait(...) in EstadoRadio._init() (around lines 274-279), so an uncaught exception there would reject the whole Future.wait, also affecting the sibling cargarPopulares/cargarFavoritos/cargarGruposFavoritos futures. Practical probability is low (path_provider directory resolution essentially never fails once the app is running) and this was self-disclosed by the apply agent (task B8 note) rather than hidden, but it is a real, verifiable narrowing of error-handling breadth in a change whose entire purpose is increasing persistence resilience. No test, old or new, exercises this path. Recommended fix: wrap the archivoCustom() call in the same or an outer try so a resolution failure degrades the same way every other failure mode in this file does.

W2 -- Multi-batch apply-progress "TDD Cycle Evidence" table only covers the final batch (Phase C). Phases A and B RED/GREEN/TRIANGULATE evidence is not carried forward as table rows in the merged artifact, topic_key upsert likely replaced rather than appended across the 3 save revisions. Not a rigor gap in the actual TDD discipline -- independently corroborated Phase A/B RED-to-GREEN cycle via direct source-diff inspection (pre-fix failure descriptions in tasks.md line up with the actual code delta) and via a full-suite re-run -- but it is a process/tooling gap that would force a future strict-TDD auditor to cross-reference tasks.md instead of relying on apply-progress alone. Recommended fix: when merging multi-batch apply-progress under one topic_key, concatenate each batch TDD Cycle Evidence rows rather than only keeping the latest batch.

SUGGESTION:

S1 -- leerPresetsPorEmisora (EQ per-station presets) has no dedicated new corruption test. Verified by direct source read that its conversion is structurally byte-for-byte identical to leerMapa (same parseMapaTolerante call shape, same parser closure, only the key-name string literal differs), and leerMapa is directly exercised by tests C2/C3. Combined with parseMapaTolerante own 5 exhaustive unit tests and the pre-existing healthy-path regression (4.1h/4.1i) that already exercises this exact method wiring, residual risk is very low. Acceptable as shipped; a follow-up one-line test would close the gap for defense-in-depth against future divergence between the two methods.

S2 -- Spec Requirement 3 "user intent wins" prose is broader than the one written scenario for stations. See Spec Compliance Matrix Note A above. Recommend a fast-follow to make the spec text explicitly distinguish decode/parse failure (authority restorable by explicit mutation) from IO/read failure (D5 deliberately stricter, non-restorable-by-mutation sub-case), so a future reader of the spec alone, without design.md, is not surprised by the asymmetry.

S3 -- EQ test C4 (and its Phase A precedent, A12) are structurally vacuous-RED characterization tests, not true bug-fix RED/GREEN pairs: EQ never had a write-suppression flag in either the old or new code, so "explicit write still succeeds after total corruption" was always true -- this specific assertion cannot be made RED by construction. This is sound engineering, a regression-lock against ever accidentally adding a flag to EQ which would violate D6, and is already well self-documented in tasks.md/apply-progress. Consider adding a short inline code comment at the test itself, not just the planning docs, so a future reader scanning the test file in isolation understands why it is a characterization test rather than a bug-proof.

S4 -- Minor cardinality mismatch between spec scenario wording and covering tests. Spec scenarios for alarms (1.1) and EQ (1.3) describe 3 valid entries plus 1 malformed; covering tests (A10, C2/C6) use 2 valid plus 1 malformed. Behaviorally equivalent and fully proves the invariant, skip-one-preserve-rest generalizes trivially from N=2 to N=3, non-blocking.

### Verdict

PASS WITH WARNINGS

Zero CRITICAL issues. All 10/10 spec scenarios independently verified compliant with named, re-executed passing tests. All 6 design decisions (D1-D6) verified against actual source diffs, not just self-reported summaries. 62/62 targeted tests and 0 flutter analyze issues independently reproduced. 60/61 tasks complete, with the sole incomplete task (D4) explicitly optional and non-blocking by its own text. Two WARNINGs are process/robustness nits: one narrow, low-probability uncaught-exception path introduced in estado_radio.dart, and one multi-batch TDD-evidence documentation gap. Neither breaks a spec requirement, blocks a task, or fails a test. Change is ready for sdd-archive; W1 is a trivial, low-risk fast-follow worth a follow-up commit but does not need to block archiving.