undocumented/implicit [TestClass]/abstract requirement for MSTEST0008 (an maybe possible others)

[LukasGelke]

Describe the bug

Description states:

Warning (active)	MSTEST0008	Methods marked with [TestInitialize] should follow the following layout to be valid:
- be 'public' 
- not be 'static'
- not be generic nor defined on a generic class
- not be 'abstract'
- not take any parameter
- return type should be 'void', 'Task' or 'ValueTask'
- not be 'async void'
- not be a special method (finalizer, operator...)

Steps To Reproduce

public sealed class MyExample1Test
{
  [TestInitialize]
  public void Init() { } // MSTEST0008
}

[TestClass]
public sealed class MyExample2Test
{
  [TestInitialize]
  public void Init() { } // allowed, because [TestClass]
}

public abstract class MyExample3Test
{
  [TestInitialize]
  public void Init() { } // allowed, because abstract
}

Expected behavior

Diagnostic Message should include (a) line(s) like:

- be defined in a `abstract` class or a class with a `TestClassAttribute`

Actual behavior

no mention of abstract/ TestClassAttribute leads to confusion

Additional context

[Evangelink]

Hi @LukasGelke,

Thanks for the feedback! We did a couple of fixes and it seems we haven't always done the follow-up for the docs.

[engyebrahim]

Hello, the rule updated rule should be:

• be defined in any class type or a sealed class marked with TestClassAttribute