feat(gate): re-align planner to close-or-merge (minimize manual review)

[JSONbored]

Re-aligns the auto-maintain planner to the canonical reviewbot decideNonContentGate model, tuned to the operator's minimize-manual goal: every PR ends in merge or close; manual review is the rare exception.

Policy (per PR):

• Merge — gate passes + CI green + mergeable + approvals + unguarded.
• Close (one-shot, contributor) — not review-good (gate blockers / red OR unverified CI) OR conflicts with base. Cites the concrete reasons. Closes even on a guarded path — the guardrail withholds a GOOD PR for review, it never rescues a bad one.
• Manual hold — only (a) a review-good PR on a protected path (approved + held for owner safety review), or (b) any not-good owner/automation PR (never closed). request_changes is the fallback when close isn't at an acting level.

Preserves #1062's fail-safe guardrail (unknown/empty changed paths → treat as guarded, never auto-merge a diff we can't see); reviewGood is computed from the real diff upstream so bad PRs still close accurately.

All 3440 unit tests pass; tsc clean.

[superagent-security]

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

[codecov]

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 86.66667% with 4 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 94.76%. Comparing base (72387df) to head (c09b89b).
⚠️ Report is 1 commits behind head on main.
✅ All tests successful. No failed tests found.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
src/settings/agent-actions.ts	86.66%	0 Missing and 4 partials ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #1085      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   94.77%   94.76%   -0.01%     
==========================================
  Files         153      153              
  Lines       18518    18526       +8     
  Branches     6699     6705       +6     
==========================================
+ Hits        17550    17556       +6     
  Misses        416      416              
- Partials      552      554       +2     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Harness.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

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

[ghost]

Caution

🟥🟥🟥🟥🟥🟥🟥🟥🟥🟥🟥🟥

🛑 Gittensory review — blocked

2 files · 2 AI reviewers · no blockers · readiness 93/100 · CI failing · unknown

🛑 Blocked

Review summary
The planner now references the variable `ciReason` before it is declared. This causes a runtime ReferenceError whenever the label action is evaluated, breaking the planning logic and potentially causing CI failures or missed actions.

Suggestions

• Move the declaration of `ciReason` above the label block, or compute the reason string within the label block without referencing a later variable.
• Add a unit test that explicitly triggers the label path with various CI states to catch this error.
• Run the test suite locally after fixing to ensure all label-related tests pass.
• Consider adding a test case for the scenario where `ciState` is `unverified` and the PR is authored by a contributor. This edge case is mentioned in the code comments but not explicitly tested.
• The `ciUnverified` variable is used in multiple places. Consider extracting it into a separate function or constant to improve readability and maintainability.

Risks

• Runtime crashes in the auto-maintain planner, leading to no actions being taken for PRs.
• Potential loss of automated merges, closes, or approvals, causing manual workload increase.
• CI pipelines may fail unexpectedly, reducing confidence in automation.
• The change introduces a new behavior where contributor PRs with unverified CI are closed. This could potentially close valid PRs if the CI verification process is delayed or fails for reasons unrelated to the PR content.

CI checks failing

• codecov/patch — 86.66% of diff hit (target 94.77%)
• codecov/project — 94.76% (-0.01%) compared to 72387df
• codecov/project — 94.76% (-0.01%) compared to 72387df
• codecov/patch — 86.66% of diff hit (target 94.77%)

Signal	Result	Evidence
Code review	✅ No blockers	2 reviewers, synthesized
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.
Review load	✅ 20/20	Readiness component derived from cached public PR metadata and labels.
Validation evidence	✅ 25/25	PR body includes validation/test evidence.
Open PR queue	✅ 10/10	0 open PR(s), 0 likely reviewable.
Contributor context	✅ Confirmed Gittensor contributor	JSONbored; Gittensor profile; 84 PR(s), 254 issue(s).
Gate result	✅ Passing	No configured blocker found.

Nits — 1 non-blocking

• No linked issue detected — If this PR is intended to solve an issue, link it explicitly in the PR body.

Review context

• Author: JSONbored
• Role context: owner (maintainer lane)
• Public audience mode: oss maintainer
• Lane context: Repository is configured for direct PR review.
• Public profile languages: Python, TypeScript, JavaScript, Ruby, Go, Kotlin, MDX, Shell
• Official Gittensor activity: 84 PR(s), 254 issue(s).
• PR-specific overlap: none found.

Contributor next steps

• Treat this as maintainer-lane context rather than normal contributor-lane activity.
• Explain no-issue PR.
• 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.
• Review load = cached public PR metadata such as size labels, changed paths, and preflight status.
• Open PR queue = repo-wide review pressure; it is not a PR quality failure.
• Contributor context = public GitHub/Gittensor identity context; non-Gittensor status is not a blocker.

Review details

Generated from public PR metadata and the diff. Advisory only; deterministic signals remain authoritative.

The planner now references the variable `ciReason` before it is declared. This causes a runtime ReferenceError whenever the label action is evaluated, breaking the planning logic and potentially causing CI failures or missed actions.

Suggestions

• Move the declaration of `ciReason` above the label block, or compute the reason string within the label block without referencing a later variable.
• Add a unit test that explicitly triggers the label path with various CI states to catch this error.
• Run the test suite locally after fixing to ensure all label-related tests pass.
• Consider adding a test case for the scenario where `ciState` is `unverified` and the PR is authored by a contributor. This edge case is mentioned in the code comments but not explicitly tested.
• The `ciUnverified` variable is used in multiple places. Consider extracting it into a separate function or constant to improve readability and maintainability.

Risks

• Runtime crashes in the auto-maintain planner, leading to no actions being taken for PRs.
• Potential loss of automated merges, closes, or approvals, causing manual workload increase.
• CI pipelines may fail unexpectedly, reducing confidence in automation.
• The change introduces a new behavior where contributor PRs with unverified CI are closed. This could potentially close valid PRs if the CI verification process is delayed or fails for reasons unrelated to the PR content.

_{🟩 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

[ghost]

Gittensory requests changes — CI is not green:

• CI is failing (codecov/patch, codecov/project, codecov/project, codecov/patch)