fix(engine): exclude evidence URLs from track-record blocklist scan

[RealDiligent]

Summary

• Exclude public evidence URLs from the track-record public-field blocklist scan (same identity-like free-text class as login under Track-record summary throws on a legitimate GitHub login that collides with the safety blocklist #6772).
• Add regression coverage for login: "team-wallet" and an evidence URL whose path contains a blocklisted substring; keep fail-closed behavior for computed fields.

Closes #7444

Test plan

• Engine track-record-summary node:test suite
• npx vitest run test/unit/track-record-summary-login-blocklist.test.ts
• git diff --check
• CI green (especially codecov/patch ≥99%)

[superagent-security]

Superagent didn't find any vulnerabilities or security issues in this PR.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 91.40%. Comparing base (253dfcb) to head (b4771a5).
⚠️ Report is 3 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #7483      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   91.41%   91.40%   -0.01%     
==========================================
  Files         717      717              
  Lines       73031    73031              
  Branches    21636    21636              
==========================================
- Hits        66761    66757       -4     
  Misses       5227     5227              
- Partials     1043     1047       +4     

Flag	Coverage Δ
shard-1	34.16% <0.00%> (ø)
shard-2	39.34% <0.00%> (-0.05%)	⬇️
shard-3	32.59% <0.00%> (-0.01%)	⬇️
shard-4	39.52% <0.00%> (-0.01%)	⬇️
shard-5	36.58% <100.00%> (ø)
shard-6	34.31% <0.00%> (ø)

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

Files with missing lines	Coverage Δ
...ckages/loopover-engine/src/track-record-summary.ts	29.45% <100.00%> (ø)

... and 1 file with indirect coverage changes

[loopover-orb]

Tip

✅ LoopOver review result - approve/merge recommended

_{Review updated: 2026-07-20 12:19:46 UTC}

3 files · 1 AI reviewer · no blockers · readiness 95/100 · CI green · clean

✅ Suggested Action - Approve/Merge

• safe to merge

Review summary
The AI review returned non-blocking notes for this change but did not include a separate narrative summary. Review the nits below before deciding this PR.

Nits — 4 non-blocking

• The root-cause fix for the false positive (both here and in Track-record summary throws on a legitimate GitHub login that collides with the safety blocklist #6772) is that `\b` doesn't respect hyphens as non-boundaries; a tighter pattern (e.g. requiring the match not be preceded/followed by `[a-z0-9-]`) would preserve fail-closed scanning for both login and evidence URLs instead of exempting entire fields — worth at least a comment on why the field-exemption approach was preferred.
• External size-smell note: track-record-summary.ts is now ~451 lines, over the repo's stated 400-line file threshold — consider whether this file should be split before it grows further.
• The new tests in track-record-summary.test.ts and the vitest suite only assert the happy path (legit URL renders); there's no test proving assertPublicSummaryText still catches a genuinely blocked term if one appeared inside an evidence URL, which is exactly the gap the blocker above describes.
• If the evidence-URL exemption is intentional, document in the comment why evidence-URL content is considered as trusted as GitHub login (both are caller/GitHub sourced) versus scanning only the URL's structural path segments and still checking query strings/fragments.

Decision drivers

• ✅ Code review — No blockers (1 reviewer)
• ✅ Gate result — Passing (No configured blocker found.)

Context & advisory signals — never blocks the verdict

Signal	Result	Evidence
Linked issue	✅ Linked	#7444
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 (1 linked issue).
Validation posture	✅ 25/25	PR body includes validation/test evidence.
Contributor workload	✅ 10/10	Author activity: 370 registered-repo PR(s), 171 merged, 34 issue(s).
Contributor context	✅ Confirmed Gittensor contributor	RealDiligent; Gittensor profile; 370 PR(s), 34 issue(s).
Improvement	✅ Minor	risk: clean · value: minor · LLM: minor

Review context

• Author: RealDiligent
• Role context: outside_contributor
• Public audience mode: oss maintainer
• Lane context: Repository is configured for direct PR review.
• Public profile languages: not available
• Official Gittensor activity: 370 PR(s), 34 issue(s).
• PR-specific overlap: none found.

Contributor next steps

• Start here: Triage stale or unlinked PRs.

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.

🧪 Chat with LoopOver

Ask LoopOver a question about this PR directly in a comment — grounded only in the same cached, public-safe facts shown above, never a new claim.

• @loopover ask <question> answers contribution-quality Q&A with source citations and freshness.
• @loopover chat <question> answers in natural prose from cached decision-pack facts via local inference (maintainer/collaborator; read-only).
• A plain-language @loopover mention with a real question is routed to the closest matching read-only command automatically — no exact syntax required.

Full command reference: https://loopover.ai/docs/loopover-commands

🧪 Experimental — new and may change.

_{🟩 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 LoopOver, a quiet PR intelligence layer for OSS maintainers.

• Re-run LoopOver review

[loopover-orb]

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