LGTM.

I'll leave it open for others to review.

Looks really close to me, just a couple touchups. 🙌

The behavior of new options would be different than the options of the @typescript-eslint/no-empty-function rule.

For example, this code is currently valid for both core no-empty-function and @typescript-eslint/no-empty-function rules:

/* eslint @typescript-eslint/no-empty-function: ["error", { "allow": ["constructors", "methods"] }] */
/* eslint no-empty-function: ["error", { "allow": ["constructors", "methods"] }] */

class A {
  private constructor() { }
}

class B {
  protected constructor() { }
}

class C {
  @decorator
  foo() { }
}

class D extends C {
  override foo() { }
}

But after this change, all 4 functions would be invalid because they're no longer considered to be of constructors/methods kind, which I'm not sure is desirable and might be considered a breaking change.

LGTM, thanks! Leaving open for @snitin315 and @JoshuaKGoldberg to re-review.

LGTM, tahnks 🙌🏻.

// @JoshuaKGoldberg

The source code looks very good and reasonable to me, nice! Requesting information from the team on what the stance on the >2k newly generated tests are, not blocking.

If everybody else is happy, then I'm happy too ☺️