Background
The Dosu-like opportunity is repo-context Q&A, but Gittensory should answer contribution-quality questions rather than becoming a generic docs chatbot.
Goal
Add GitHub command answers from connected repo/docs/signal sources, scoped to contribution quality and repo policy.
Current Behavior
Gittensory has strong structured signals, but not a source-cited GitHub Q&A layer.
Desired Behavior
Maintainers and authorized contributors can ask Gittensory contribution-context questions with cited answers.
Implementation Requirements
- Use repo README/docs only when app permissions allow.
- Use issues, PRs, reviews, checks, signal snapshots, focus manifests, and upstream rulesets as sources.
- Cite sources and freshness.
- Require explicit opt-in before indexing private source/docs.
- Do not send source content to optional AI unless explicitly allowed.
Public/Private Output Boundaries
Public GitHub output must never include wallets, hotkeys, payout/reward estimates, raw trust scores, public score estimates, private reviewability, private scoreability context, or farming language. Private API/MCP/control-panel surfaces may show authenticated scoreability, blockers, projections, and evidence, but must not claim guaranteed payout outcomes.
Acceptance Criteria
- Answers cite sources.
- No source indexing for private repos unless explicitly allowed.
- No source content sent to optional AI without opt-in.
- Tests cover permission boundaries and stale sources.
Testing Requirements
npm run test:ci must pass.
- Global coverage must remain at or above 97% for lines, statements, functions, and branches.
- Aim for 98%+ branch coverage locally.
- Add tests for every new branch, fallback path, sanitizer rule, and regression.
- Add invariant/property-style tests when behavior depends on sorting, gating, scoring, source-upload safety, public/private boundaries, or telemetry privacy.
- MCP/local tooling must prove source contents are not uploaded when local metadata is involved.
- Public GitHub output must be tested against forbidden language: wallet, hotkey, raw trust score, payout, reward estimate, farming, private reviewability, and public score estimate.
Background
The Dosu-like opportunity is repo-context Q&A, but Gittensory should answer contribution-quality questions rather than becoming a generic docs chatbot.
Goal
Add GitHub command answers from connected repo/docs/signal sources, scoped to contribution quality and repo policy.
Current Behavior
Gittensory has strong structured signals, but not a source-cited GitHub Q&A layer.
Desired Behavior
Maintainers and authorized contributors can ask Gittensory contribution-context questions with cited answers.
Implementation Requirements
Public/Private Output Boundaries
Public GitHub output must never include wallets, hotkeys, payout/reward estimates, raw trust scores, public score estimates, private reviewability, private scoreability context, or farming language. Private API/MCP/control-panel surfaces may show authenticated scoreability, blockers, projections, and evidence, but must not claim guaranteed payout outcomes.
Acceptance Criteria
Testing Requirements
npm run test:cimust pass.