fix(miner): treat null listClaims filters as unscoped

[jony376]

Summary

• Treat null repoFullName and status filters in listClaims as unscoped, matching governor-ledger and event-ledger read semantics.
• Prevents { repoFullName: null } from throwing and { status: null } from being rejected as invalid_status.

Scope

• The PR title follows type(scope): short summary Conventional Commit format.
• Focused on claim-ledger list filtering only — no unrelated miner CLI or UI changes.

Validation

• npm run test:ci locally — CI will run the full gate on push.
• Unit tests cover null repo/status filters returning all claims.

Safety

• No secrets, wallet details, hotkeys, or private scoring output in code or PR text.
• Deterministic, read/write-local only: no network calls.

UI Evidence

Not applicable — miner library only.

Notes

Follow-up consistency fix after #2955 null read-filter normalization in the event ledger.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 96.06%. Comparing base (8833803) to head (499282c).
⚠️ Report is 2 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main    #2978   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   96.06%   96.06%           
=======================================
  Files         259      259           
  Lines       28663    28663           
  Branches    10431    10431           
=======================================
  Hits        27536    27536           
  Misses        490      490           
  Partials      637      637           

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• 📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

[loopover-orb]

Warning

🟨🟨🟨🟨🟨🟨🟨🟨🟨🟨🟨🟨

⏸️ Gittensory review result - manual review recommended

_{Review updated: 2026-07-04 08:06:25 UTC}

3 files · 1 AI reviewer · no blockers · readiness 73/100 · CI green · clean

⏸️ Suggested Action - Manual Review

Review summary
This change updates claim-ledger list filtering so null repoFullName/status values are normalized to the same unscoped path as undefined, and the .d.ts contract now matches the runtime behavior. The implementation routes null filters through the existing prepared-statement branches without touching persistence or mutation paths, and the added unit test covers the all-null cases. I do not see a reachable correctness break in the provided diff.

Nits — 3 non-blocking

• test/unit/miner-claim-ledger.test.ts:110: nit: the new test covers all-null inputs but not mixed null/concrete filters, so the intended partial-unscoping behavior is less explicitly locked down.
• test/unit/miner-claim-ledger.test.ts:110: add assertions for mixed cases such as `{ repoFullName: null, status: "active" }` and `{ repoFullName: "o/a", status: null }` to document that only the null field is unscoped.
• Readiness score is below the configured threshold — Use the readiness panel as advisory maintainer context; the score does not block this PR.

Signal	Result	Evidence
Code review	✅ No blockers	1 reviewer
Linked issue	⚠️ Missing	No linked issue or no-issue rationale found.
Related work	✅ No active overlap found	No same-issue or scoped active PR overlap found.
Change scope	✅ 20/20	Low review scope from cached public metadata (no linked issue context).
Validation posture	❌ 5/25	Preflight is holding this PR: the review lane is unavailable, so it is not ready for automated review.
Contributor workload	✅ 10/10	Author activity: 927 registered-repo PR(s), 659 merged, 38 issue(s).
Contributor context	✅ Confirmed Gittensor contributor	jony376; Gittensor profile; 927 PR(s), 38 issue(s).
Gate result	✅ Passing	No configured blocker found.

Review context

• Author: jony376
• Role context: outside_contributor
• Public audience mode: oss maintainer
• Lane context: Repository registration is not available in the local Gittensory cache.
• Public profile languages: not available
• Official Gittensor activity: 927 PR(s), 38 issue(s).
• PR-specific overlap: none found.

Contributor next steps

• Explain no-issue PR.
• Await review-lane availability.
• Refresh registry data or choose a registered active repo.
• Link the issue being solved, or explicitly explain why this is a no-issue PR.

Signal definitions

• Related work = same linked issue, overlapping active PRs, or title/path similarity.
• Change scope = cached public metadata such as size labels, draft state, and review-burden hints.
• Validation posture = whether the PR provides enough public validation/test evidence for maintainer review.
• Contributor workload = public contributor activity and cleanup pressure, not a repo-wide quality failure.
• Contributor context = public GitHub/Gittensor identity context; non-Gittensor status is not a blocker.

_{🟩 Safe / merged · 🟦 Advisory · 🟨 Held for review · 🟥 Blocked / closed}

---

💰 Earn for open-source contributions like this. Gittensor lets GitHub contributors earn for the work they already do — register to start earning →.

Checked by Gittensory, a quiet PR intelligence layer for OSS maintainers.

• Re-run Gittensory review

[loopover-orb]

Gittensory approves — the gate is satisfied and CI is green.