Table type annotations

Hello everyone.

I've defined a field as table<MyStates, BaseState>, but the analyzer doesn't complain when I assign a table with a completely different structure to it.

---@class BaseState
local BaseState = {}

---@enum MyStates
local States = {
    GAME = 1,
    GAME_OVER = 2,
}

---@class MyStateMachine
---@field private _states table<MyStates, BaseState>
local MyStateMachine = {}
MyStateMachine.__index = MyStateMachine

---@param states table<MyStates, BaseState>
function MyStateMachine:setStates(states)
    self._states = states
end

function tmp()
    -- Assigning a table with a different annotation directly. The analyzer doesn't complain.
    MyStateMachine._states = {
        ['kek'] = 69
    }
    -- Passing a table with a different annotation to a method. The analyzer doesn't complain.
    MyStateMachine:setStates({
        ['kek'] = 69,
    })
    -- The analyzer correctly complains about a number assignment.
    -- MyStateMachine._states = 69
    -- The analyzer correctly complains about passing a number.
    -- MyStateMachine:setStates(2)
end

As you can see, the type checker only seems to validate that the value is a table, but doesn't validate the internal key and value types for table<MyStates, BaseState>. Is this the expected behavior, or am I missing something? Is there a way to enforce stricter type checking for the contents of generic tables?

Reproduce the report with the supplied Lua example and inspect the language server's generic-table type checking entry points. Verify whether assignments and method arguments validate both key and value types, then add or update coverage so incompatible table contents produce diagnostics while valid tables remain accepted.