[Quality] Make health metrics updates internally consistent

[1nonlypiece]

Problem

Fees, drawdowns, violations, and compliance scores must agree regardless of operation order or repeated reads.

This issue requires a meaningful production implementation. Typo-only, documentation-only, formatting-only, dependency-only, or cosmetic changes do not satisfy the scope.

Objective

Centralize metric updates and prove consistency across all attestation paths.

Scope

Define score bounds, cumulative counters, event ordering, and behavior when a record is rejected.

Acceptance criteria

• Counters and scores never exceed their documented bounds.
• Equivalent operation sequences produce equivalent totals.
• Rejected records leave metrics unchanged.
• Integration tests cover empty, single, mixed, repeated, and maximum-value histories.
• Existing CI/CD checks remain green.
• The PR explains the design, tradeoffs, test evidence, and any remaining limitations.
• The PR references this issue with Closes #{issue-number} or Fixes #{issue-number}.

Implementation notes

Implement only the stated behavior; keep unrelated refactors out of the PR.

Non-goals

• Do not remove tests merely to make CI pass.
• Do not introduce secrets, private keys, credentials, or mainnet-only values.
• Do not change unrelated APIs, UI surfaces, contract behavior, or deployment configuration.

Contributor application

Before starting, comment with relevant experience, a 1–4 bullet implementation approach, and an estimate for opening the first draft PR. Wait for maintainer assignment before coding. Only the assigned contributor is eligible for reward consideration.

Submission requirements

• Use PR title format [#<issue-number>] <short summary>.
• Check off each completed acceptance criterion.
• Include focused automated tests for success, failure, authorization, and boundary behavior where applicable.
• Include the validation commands and results in the PR description.
• Address maintainer review feedback before merge.

GrantFox reward consideration is based on the original scope, implementation quality, tests, security review, CI/CD results, review feedback, and follow-up stability; completion or merge alone is not a guarantee.

[Baskarayelu]

I’d love to be assigned this issue and contribute across the relevant areas, whether it involves smart contracts, UI development, backend logic, design implementation, or overall system integration. I’m comfortable working across the full stack and can adapt to the project’s technical requirements to ensure a smooth and consistent contribution.

[grantfox-oss]

🦊 GrantFox — @Baskarayelu has been assigned to this issue!

Next steps:

1. Open a Pull Request referencing this issue (e.g., Closes #549)
2. Your PR will be reviewed by the Commitlabs-Org maintainers

Good luck! Track your progress on GrantFox.

[Baskarayelu]

Implemented the requested metric consistency work in PR #562: https://github.com/Commitlabs-Org/Commitlabs-Contracts/pull/562\n\nThe PR adds bounded fee/drawdown validation for single and batch writes, checked aggregate and counter arithmetic with atomic rollback, and deterministic empty/single/mixed/repeated/maximum/overflow tests. Validation: cargo +1.88.0 test -p attestation_engine --lib (56 passed).

[grantfox-oss]

🎉 This issue has been marked as completed on GrantFox!

@Baskarayelu's PR #562 was approved and merged by @1nonlypiece.

🏆 @Baskarayelu: You earned 45 FoxPoints for this contribution! Your current tier: Specialist (4,311 total points). Track your full progress on GrantFox.

👏 Great work, @Baskarayelu! Keep contributing to Commitlabs-Org.