Seems like eslint#17656 introduced an unintended change in `no-warnings-comments.js` where before it roughly looked like:

```js
var configuration = context.options[0] || {};
var decoration = [...configuration.decoration || []].join("");
```

And afterwards it looks like:

```js
const [{ decoration, location, terms: warningTerms }] = context.options;
```

Which unintentionally(?) removes the `context.options[0] || {}` default, which eg. causes `eslint-plugin-unicorn@<15.0.1` to fail (see sindresorhus/eslint-plugin-unicorn#2497)

Since this happened in a minor `eslint` release but the fix for `eslint-plugin-unicorn` is only available as a patch to its latest major, this is causing me some issues.

My guess is that you won't be wanting to merge this though as `eslint-plugin-unicorn` is [extending that rule](https://github.com/sindresorhus/eslint-plugin-unicorn/blob/8b7c5fcf5c9743db4afde0bb9c90cc51782d47ef/rules/utils/get-builtin-rule.js#L4) through:

```js
require('eslint/use-at-your-own-risk').builtinRules.get('no-warning-comments')
```

And as discussed in eslint#19013 you don't consider that a good practise:

> It's in unstable APIs because rule APIs are indeed not stable

> Core rules are not intended to extended any you do so at your own risk

Perhaps eslint#19013 or similar can suggest an alternative for eg. `eslint-plugin-unicorn` to avoid this happening again in the future, but my guess is you consider such suggestions to be out of scope of `eslint` and as such to not be something you ant to get involved in.

Here's a PR fixing the regression at least, you decide if you want to accept it or reject it 🤷‍♂️