feat(enrichment): add conventional-commit subject linter analyzer

[jaso0n0818]

Closes #2021

What

A new github-light REES analyzer, commitLint, that lints a PR's commit subjects against the Conventional Commits spec and flags each non-conforming subject — a wrong/absent type, a missing type: structure, an over-long subject, or an empty subject. A house-rule the gate cares about, surfaced early to the reviewer.

Detection

• Reads the PR's commit subjects from the structured GitHub PR-commits API (one bounded page, commit.message only) through the shared bounded-fetch layer, following commit-hygiene.ts / commit-signature.ts exactly. Each subject is linted independently — no cross-commit or cross-line state, and the subject strings arrive from the API already clean (no diff/comment/string parsing).
• lintSubject reason precedence: empty (blank subject) → too-long (> 72 chars) → missing-colon (not type(scope)?!?: summary) → bad-type (type not in the Conventional-Commits/commitlint preset set: feat, fix, docs, style, refactor, perf, test, build, ci, chore, revert). A parenthesized scope and the ! breaking-change marker are both optional per the spec.
• The finding carries a short SHA prefix, the (truncated) subject, and the reason — never author/email. Findings capped (maxFindings: 25).
• Fail-safe: no token, a bad repo slug, or any fetch error yields no finding rather than an error.

Registration

Registered as a github-light descriptor (category quality, requires ["github-token"]) with an inline render(), following the commitHygiene descriptor shape. All wiring updated: types.ts (CommitLintFinding + commitLint? key), render.ts, analyzer-registry.test.ts, root src/review/enrichment-analyzer-names.ts (canonical REES_ANALYZER_NAMES), root test/unit/enrichment-wire.test.ts, and the generated analyzer-metadata.json / rees-analyzers.ts / .env.example via node scripts/generate-analyzer-metadata.mjs.

Tests

review-enrichment/test/commit-lint.test.ts (8 tests) covers: a conforming subject (with/without scope and breaking marker) passing, each non-conforming reason, the empty/too-long precedence, analyzeCommitSubjects reporting only non-conforming subjects with a short sha + truncated subject, subject-line-only linting (body ignored), the maxFindings cap + no-sha skip, the end-to-end fetch path, and the fail-safe paths (no token, bad slug, fetch error). Analyzer metadata is regenerated and committed.

[superagent-security]

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

[loopover-orb]

Caution

🟥🟥🟥🟥🟥🟥🟥🟥🟥🟥🟥🟥

🛑 Gittensory review result - reject/close recommended

_{Review updated: 2026-07-05 04:21:49 UTC}

11 files · 1 AI reviewer · 1 blocker · readiness 80/100 · CI pending · blocked

🛑 Suggested Action - Reject/Close

• AI reviewers agree on a likely critical defect: review-enrichment/src/analyzers/commit-lint.ts:90 lowercases the captured type before checking ALLOWED_TYPES, so `FEAT: add thing` is treated as valid even though the analyzer claims to enforce the finite Conventional-Commits/commitlint preset type set
• change it to a case-sensitive check (`if (!ALLOWED_TYPES.has(match[1]!)) return "bad-type"
• `) or explicitly document and test that uppercase types are intentionally accepted. — Resolve the flagged defect, or override if the AI reviewers are mistaken, then re-run the gate.

Review summary
The change adds a bounded GitHub PR-commits analyzer and wires it through the REES registry, renderer, metadata, UI docs, and analyzer-name allowlist. The implementation follows the existing fetch/analyze/render split and the core path is bounded by commit count and finding count. I do see one correctness gap in the linter: it accepts uppercase commit types even though the documented allowed type set is the conventional lowercase preset.

Blockers

• review-enrichment/src/analyzers/commit-lint.ts:90 lowercases the captured type before checking ALLOWED_TYPES, so `FEAT: add thing` is treated as valid even though the analyzer claims to enforce the finite Conventional-Commits/commitlint preset type set; change it to a case-sensitive check (`if (!ALLOWED_TYPES.has(match[1]!)) return "bad-type";`) or explicitly document and test that uppercase types are intentionally accepted.

Nits — 5 non-blocking

• nit: review-enrichment/src/analyzers/commit-lint.ts:77 hard-codes `512 * 1024` inline while the rest of the analyzer names its other limits; extract a `MAX_RESPONSE_BYTES` constant so the descriptor/docs and fetch bound stay auditable.
• nit: review-enrichment/src/analyzers/commit-lint.ts:117 hard-codes the rendered subject truncation length separately from the named analyzer limits; add a `MAX_REPORTED_SUBJECT_LEN` constant or include it in the descriptor limits if reviewers depend on that cap.
• nit: review-enrichment/src/analyzers/commit-lint.ts:43 allows an empty scope like `feat(): summary`; if that is intentional, add a test, otherwise tighten the scope group to require at least one non-`)` character.
• review-enrichment/src/analyzers/commit-lint.ts:90 should either preserve case-sensitive type validation or add explicit tests for uppercase accepted/rejected behavior so the house rule is unambiguous.
• review-enrichment/test/commit-lint.test.ts should add a case for `FEAT: add thing` and, if kept, `feat(): add thing` to lock down the analyzer's actual contract.

Why this is blocked

• review-enrichment/src/analyzers/commit-lint.ts:90 lowercases the captured type before checking ALLOWED_TYPES, so `FEAT: add thing` is treated as valid even though the analyzer claims to enforce the finite Conventional-Commits/commitlint preset type set; change it to a case-sensitive check (`if (!ALLOWED_TYPES.has(match[1]!)) return "bad-type";`) or explicitly document and test that uppercase types are intentionally accepted.

Signal	Result	Evidence
Code review	❌ 1 blocker	1 reviewer
Linked issue	✅ Linked	#2021
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	❌ 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: 444 registered-repo PR(s), 267 merged, 7 issue(s).
Contributor context	✅ Confirmed Gittensor contributor	jaso0n0818; Gittensor profile; 444 PR(s), 7 issue(s).
Gate result	❌ Blocking	Repo-configured hard blocker found.

Review context

• Author: jaso0n0818
• 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: 444 PR(s), 7 issue(s).
• PR-specific overlap: none found.

Contributor next steps

• Await review-lane availability.
• Refresh registry data or choose a registered active repo.

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 is closing this pull request on the maintainer's behalf (AI reviewers agree on a likely critical defect: review-enrichment/src/analyzers/commit-lint.ts:90 lowercases the captured type before checking ALLOWED_TYPES, so `FEAT: add thing` is treated as valid even though the analyzer claims to enforce the finite Conventional-Commits/commitlint preset type set; change it to a case-sensitive check (`if (!ALLOWED_TYPES.has(match[1]!)) return "bad-type";`) or explicitly document and test that uppercase types are intentionally accepted.). This is an automated maintenance action — to pursue this change, please open a new pull request with the issues resolved. Closed PRs may be analyzed later to improve review accuracy, but they are not automatically reopened or re-reviewed.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 93.88%. Comparing base (9e87b4c) to head (e5fc023).
⚠️ Report is 2 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main    #3343   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   93.88%   93.88%           
=======================================
  Files         280      280           
  Lines       30552    30552           
  Branches    11130    11130           
=======================================
  Hits        28684    28684           
  Misses       1211     1211           
  Partials      657      657           

Files with missing lines	Coverage Δ
src/review/enrichment-analyzer-names.ts	100.00% <ø> (ø)

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

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