Fix CFF citation schema and metadata consistency checks

[Gambit-Checkmate]

Summary

CITATION.cff is rejected by the CFF 1.2.0 schema, preventing citation exports. Add the required citation message, replace maintainers with contact, expand ORCID identifiers to full URLs, and remove the unsupported description field while preserving the existing abstract.

Update the metadata consistency check to read contact. Package descriptions continue to be compared between pyproject.toml and meta.yaml; the longer citation abstract is intentionally independent.

Closes #285.

Validation

• Confirmed that cffconvert --validate -i CITATION.cff failed on the original file and passes after the change.
• BibTeX and APA-like exports both succeed.
• Verified separately that adding the DOI identifier proposed in Add Zenodo concept DOI and date-released to CITATION.cff #284 to the corrected metadata produces a valid BibTeX entry containing 10.5281/zenodo.7735001. This PR does not duplicate the DOI/date changes from Add Zenodo concept DOI and date-released to CITATION.cff #284.
• python scripts/check_metadata.py passes. Deliberately mismatching a package description or contact email still raises the expected consistency error.
• pytest --benchmark-disable -q: 481 passed (Windows, Python 3.12).
• Ruff lint/format and git diff --check pass.
• All applicable pre-commit hooks pass on the three changed files, including the always-run metadata check.

AI assistance was used to prepare this contribution and run the checks above.

[Copilot]

🟢 Approval recommended

No unresolved review comments were identified, and the supplied assessments support approval.

Pull request overview

Updates citation metadata to comply with CFF 1.2.0 and keeps package metadata checks consistent.

Changes:

• Corrected CFF fields, contacts, ORCID URLs, and required message.
• Updated metadata validation for contacts and independent descriptions.
• Documented the fix in the changelog.

File summaries

File	Description
scripts/check_metadata.py	Uses CFF contacts and validates package descriptions independently.
CITATION.cff	Corrected schema-invalid citation fields and identifiers.
CHANGELOG.md	Documents the citation schema fix.

Review details

• Files reviewed: 3/3 changed files
• Comments generated: 0
• Review effort level: Lite

---

💡 Add a code-review agent skill or configure MCP servers for context-aware, tailored reviews. Learn more in the docs.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 94.49%. Comparing base (e6359c6) to head (2e48f8d).

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main     #290   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   94.49%   94.49%           
=======================================
  Files          49       49           
  Lines        4163     4163           
=======================================
  Hits         3934     3934           
  Misses        229      229           

☔ View full report in Codecov by Harness.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

[medley56]

Does exactly what #285 asks and nothing more. I re-verified the schema claims against the CFF 1.2.0 schema.json (message is required; contact is a valid root key; description and maintainers are not; orcid must match https://orcid.org/…), confirmed cffconvert --validate fails on main and passes on this branch, and ran python scripts/check_metadata.py clean on the head checkout. The one substantive observation is pre-existing and left as a suggestion for a follow-up issue.

Coordination note: #284 also adds under ## [Unreleased] in CHANGELOG.md, so whichever of the two merges second will need a trivial rebase.

0 critical · 0 warning · 1 suggestion · 0 nitpick

🤖 AI-assisted comment, reviewed and approved by @medley56 before posting.