💭 I'm examining the changed files to identify Effect service convention violations, particularly looking at how modules are imported. The AccountLimitsService.test.ts file uses an alias that collapses the module namespace when importing the layer, which goes against the convention of importing service modules as a namespace at service boundaries—though this is in a test file, so the rule's applicability might differ. I should verify the actual files to confirm whether these are genuine violations and check how other imports like HostProcessEnvironment and helper functions are being used. I'm noticing the test is using an alias import that obscures the module namespace, which violates the naming convention. I should refactor it to use a namespace import instead, then access the layer through that namespace. Let me check how other test files in the repository handle similar imports to match the established pattern. The HostProcessEnvironment import follows the repo's convention, so that's fine. Now I need to check how the test file handles its alias imports and look at other AccountLimits-related tests to see if there's a consistent pattern. Let me search the codebase for the layer as import pattern to understand how prevalent it is. This is the only place in the codebase where this convention is violated, and it was introduced in this PR. Looking at the imports across the test files, AccountLimitsService.ts imports ServerConfig directly while its test file uses a namespace import — that's consistent. The test also uses Effect.runPromise in regular test cases, which is fine at the test boundary. I'm checking how deriveProviderInstanceCon is handled... The helper function is imported cleanly, and while it's in a "Layers" directory, that file-layout rule only applies to moved modules, not this change. The test file properly imports ACCOUNT_LIMITS_CONTRACT_VERSION from contracts, and the web file uses named imports correctly. For the config handling, configMap is passed as a pure value and hostEnvironment comes from the environment — both good. The error handling with Effect.catchCause is a pre-existing pattern, not a catchTags issue. I need to verify the new test file imports AccountLimitsService as a namespace at the service boundary, which would be the fix needed. The only real issue is that aliased layer as accountLimitsLayer import in the test file. Even though it's just a test, the rule explicitly calls out this pattern at service boundaries, so I should flag it with an inline comment and mark this as a failure.

1. modify_pr — One convention finding: the new service test aliases the service module's layer export instead of importing the module as a namespace. Everything else in the touched Effect code (subpath namespace imports, Context.Service shape, dependency acquisition via yield*, test-only Layer.succeed seams, runPromise confined to test boundaries) matches the conventions.