Add additional tags to query metadata

[jeongsoolee09]

Description

The Conversions rule package was missing some tags in every query it had. Add reasonable tags to each:

• 7.0.1:
  • maintainability: Tracking which expressions are actually bool would be challenging.
  • readability: It would be puzzling to see a bool in a numeric context.
  • correctness: The bool type expression might be accidentally included in a non-bool context, which would still pass the type checker.
• 7.0.2:
  • maintainability, readability, correctness: similar reason as for 7-0-1.
• 7.0.3:
  • maintainability: Similar to reasons above.
  • readability: It would be puzzling to see a character literal in a numeric context, though it sometimes be needed (e.g. ASCII value).
• 7.0.4:
  • correctness: May flip the signedness.
• 7.0.5:
  • correctness: For similar reason as 7.0.4.
  • maintainability: It may be challenging to keep track of the signedness of both left-hand and right-hand-side operands.
• 7.0.6:
  • correctness, maintainability: For similar reasons as 7.0.5.
• 7.11.3:
  • correctness: As stated in the standard, it may signal programmer's mistake where the argument list is inadvertently omitted.
  • readability: It may be puzzling to see a function pointer in a boolean / numeric context, and the intent is ambiguous as stated in the standard.

Change request type

• Release or process automation (GitHub workflows, internal scripts)
• Internal documentation
• External documentation
• Query files (.ql, .qll, .qls or unit tests)
• External scripts (analysis report or other code shipped as part of a release)

Rules with added or modified queries

• No rules added
• Queries have been added for the following rules:
  • rule number here
• Queries have been modified for the following rules:
  • rule number here

Release change checklist

A change note (development_handbook.md#change-notes) is required for any pull request which modifies:

• The structure or layout of the release artifacts.
• The evaluation performance (memory, execution time) of an existing query.
• The results of an existing query in any circumstance.

If you are only adding new rule queries, a change note is not required.

Author: Is a change note required?

• Yes
• No

🚨🚨🚨
Reviewer: Confirm that format of shared queries (not the .qll file, the
.ql file that imports it) is valid by running them within VS Code.

• Confirmed

Reviewer: Confirm that either a change note is not required or the change note is required and has been added.

• Confirmed

Query development review checklist

For PRs that add new queries or modify existing queries, the following checklist should be completed by both the author and reviewer:

Author

• Have all the relevant rule package description files been checked in?
• Have you verified that the metadata properties of each new query is set appropriately?
• Do all the unit tests contain both "COMPLIANT" and "NON_COMPLIANT" cases?
• Are the alert messages properly formatted and consistent with the style guide?
• Have you run the queries on OpenPilot and verified that the performance and results are acceptable?
  As a rule of thumb, predicates specific to the query should take no more than 1 minute, and for simple queries be under 10 seconds. If this is not the case, this should be highlighted and agreed in the code review process.
• Does the query have an appropriate level of in-query comments/documentation?
• Have you considered/identified possible edge cases?
• Does the query not reinvent features in the standard library?
• Can the query be simplified further (not golfed!)

Reviewer

• Have all the relevant rule package description files been checked in?
• Have you verified that the metadata properties of each new query is set appropriately?
• Do all the unit tests contain both "COMPLIANT" and "NON_COMPLIANT" cases?
• Are the alert messages properly formatted and consistent with the style guide?
• Have you run the queries on OpenPilot and verified that the performance and results are acceptable?
  As a rule of thumb, predicates specific to the query should take no more than 1 minute, and for simple queries be under 10 seconds. If this is not the case, this should be highlighted and agreed in the code review process.
• Does the query have an appropriate level of in-query comments/documentation?
• Have you considered/identified possible edge cases?
• Does the query not reinvent features in the standard library?
• Can the query be simplified further (not golfed!)

[MichaelRFairhurst]

🙌 Can we get a change note?