[exKAZUu]

Why

A provides Service with First, Second directive exposes Second through its provider field but leaves First unlabelled. Field queries therefore miss the only implementation in a single-provider directive and the first implementation in longer lists.

Requirements

• required: Improve the fork grammar using unresolved fork issues and useful major upstream changes, without preserving backward compatibility.
• required: Avoid duplicate work and give each independent improvement its own PR based on the latest main branch.
• required: Run review-booster and complete-pr concurrently, then merge, publish, and verify the release.
• chosen: Use the existing provider field for every implementation because callers should find the complete provider list through one field query.

Customer Summary

Field access and structural queries return every service implementation in a Java module directive, including the first or only provider.

Technical Summary

provides_module_directive assigns provider to its first implementation as well as subsequent implementations. Generated parser metadata makes the field required. The public WASM API regression checks the service field, ordered provider fields, query captures, and source ranges for one, two, and three implementations.

Testing

bun run build/ci, bun run verify, and bun wb test test/unit/moduleProviders.test.ts test/unit/corpus.test.ts test/unit/wasm.test.ts pass. The new regression fails on the unchanged parser and passes with the fix. Both native and WASM execution pass all 165 corpus cases. The complete module compiles cleanly with JDK 27. All PR CI checks pass, including the full suite, native platform checks, Rust, and fuzzing. Five review sessions completed successfully with no findings; the pushed revision was reviewed by at least one successful exploration session, with full coverage unverified.