Just thinking out loud, but wouldn't this be best handled with separate commits for each of these atomic changes, with a merge commit describing the intent ins narrative form?
Good question. The example message is adapted from a fast-moving innovation stream; it's an example of moving quickly and getting a lot of major work done.
In a more mature area, pace of work could often be slower and commits more granular. Until it's necessary to refactor/ reengineer things -- then commits are often larger again.
Don't ask me if I practice what I pushed there