docs(review): rename gittensory prose to loopover in src/review (batch B)

[JSONbored]

Summary

• Part of the gittensory→loopover rebrand (Epic: complete the gittensory -> loopover rebrand (full cutover, no dual-support) #5705), phase 8b: rename brand-name prose in comments across the second half of src/review/** — ops/outcomes/parity wiring, PR reconciliation, prompt-injection, public-stats, RAG, repo/skill doc rendering, secrets scanning, self-tune, stats, and the visual-capture pipeline. Comment-only, no behavior change.
• Deliberately left untouched: the 'gittensory-native' review_audit.source discriminator (a real DB column value recorded across parity/outcomes tracking — renaming it would desync new writes from historically-recorded rows, since it's compared against via LOOPOVER_NATIVE_SOURCE in parity-wire.ts).

Scope

• The PR title follows type(scope): short summary Conventional Commit format.
• This PR is focused and does not mix unrelated backend, UI, MCP, docs, dependency, and deploy changes.
• This follows CONTRIBUTING.md and does not reintroduce GitHub Pages, VitePress, site/, or CNAME.
• I linked a currently open issue this PR resolves — N/A, maintainer-authored rebrand-epic cleanup (Epic: complete the gittensory -> loopover rebrand (full cutover, no dual-support) #5705), no linked-issue gate applies to owner PRs.

Validation

• git diff --check
• npm run actionlint (via npm run test:ci)
• npm run typecheck (via npm run test:ci)
• npm run test:coverage — full unsharded run, 100% green; comment-only diff, no coverable lines changed
• npm run test:workers (via npm run test:ci)
• npm run build:mcp (via npm run test:ci)
• npm run test:mcp-pack (via npm run test:ci)
• npm run ui:openapi:check (via npm run test:ci)
• npm run ui:lint (via npm run test:ci)
• npm run ui:typecheck (via npm run test:ci)
• npm run ui:build (via npm run test:ci)
• npm audit --audit-level=moderate
• Full npm run test:ci gate run locally, exit 0

Safety

• No secrets, wallet details, hotkeys, coldkeys, user PATs, private keys, raw trust scores, private rankings, or private maintainer evidence are exposed.
• Public GitHub text stays sanitized, low-noise, and does not imply compensation guarantees or optimization tactics.
• Auth, cookie, CORS, GitHub App, Cloudflare, or session changes include negative-path tests. — N/A, no such changes.
• API/OpenAPI/MCP behavior is updated and tested where needed. — N/A, comment-only, no behavior change.
• UI changes use live API data or real empty/error/loading states. — N/A, no UI changes.
• Visible UI changes include a UI Evidence section. — N/A, no UI changes.
• Public docs/changelogs are updated where needed; changelogs are only edited for release-prep PRs (none touched here).

Notes

• One of several batched PRs covering the bulk-prose portion of rebrand epic Epic: complete the gittensory -> loopover rebrand (full cutover, no dual-support) #5705. Follows docs(review): rename gittensory prose to loopover in src/review (batch A) #5883 (batch A).

[superagent-security]

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

[loopover-orb]

Caution

🟥🟥🟥🟥🟥🟥🟥🟥🟥🟥🟥🟥

🛑 LoopOver review result - fixes required

_{Review updated: 2026-07-14 21:33:47 UTC}

27 files · 1 AI reviewer · 2 blockers · readiness 80/100 · CI failing · blocked

🛑 Suggested Action - Manual Review

Review summary
This PR renames gittensory→loopover prose in comments across ~25 files in src/review/**, and for nearly all of them the diff genuinely only touches comments (no code identifiers changed). However, two files break the PR's own stated invariant: src/review/repo-doc-render.ts and src/review/repo-skill-render.ts change the literal exported string constants REPO_DOC_MARKER_START/END and REPO_SKILL_MARKER_START/END from `<!-- gittensory-repo-doc:start -->` to `<!-- loopover-repo-doc:start -->` (and the skill-doc equivalent) — these are not comments, they are data embedded as HTML-comment markers inside every AGENTS.md/skill doc this engine has already generated and written to real repos. The PR explicitly argues elsewhere (parity-wire.ts) that renaming a recorded-value discriminator would desync new writes from historically-recorded data, yet applies the opposite treatment to these markers without any migration/backfill for already-published docs.

Blockers

• src/review/repo-doc-render.ts:17-18 and src/review/repo-skill-render.ts:16-17 change REPO_DOC_MARKER_START/END and REPO_SKILL_MARKER_START/END from the `gittensory-*` marker text to `loopover-*` — any repo's AGENTS.md/skill doc already written with the old markers (per generated-doc-refresh.ts's start/end pair matching) will no longer be recognized as the machine-generated section on the next refresh, causing it to be treated as manual content (skipped) or duplicated with a second, differently-marked generated block, contradicting the PR's own 'comment-only, no behavior change' claim and the exact desync concern it raises for LOOPOVER_NATIVE_SOURCE.

Nits — 5 non-blocking

• The PR description doesn't mention the marker-constant change at all, so a reviewer skimming the summary would miss that this diff isn't purely comment prose.
• Consider whether a companion migration/rewrite step is needed for already-published AGENTS.md files, similar to how the DB discriminator was deliberately left untouched.
• Revert the REPO_DOC_MARKER_START/END and REPO_SKILL_MARKER_START/END changes in repo-doc-render.ts and repo-skill-render.ts to keep the `gittensory-*` marker literals stable, exactly as was done for LOOPOVER_NATIVE_SOURCE in parity-wire.ts, or explicitly land a backfill/dual-marker-matching change alongside the rename if the marker text truly needs to change.
• If the marker rename is intentional, update generated-doc-refresh.ts (not shown in this diff) to match both old and new marker forms during a transition window, and note that migration step in the PR description.
• Code changes lack test evidence — Add focused regression tests or explain why existing coverage is sufficient.

Why this is blocked

• src/review/repo-doc-render.ts:17-18 and src/review/repo-skill-render.ts:16-17 change REPO_DOC_MARKER_START/END and REPO_SKILL_MARKER_START/END from the `gittensory-*` marker text to `loopover-*` — any repo's AGENTS.md/skill doc already written with the old markers (per generated-doc-refresh.ts's start/end pair matching) will no longer be recognized as the machine-generated section on the next refresh, causing it to be treated as manual content (skipped) or duplicated with a second, differently-marked generated block, contradicting the PR's own 'comment-only, no behavior change' claim and the exact desync concern it raises for LOOPOVER_NATIVE_SOURCE.
• No linked issue detected — If this PR is intended to solve an issue, link it explicitly in the PR body.

📋 Copy for AI agents — paste into your coding agent

Fix the following blocker(s) from this PR review:

1. src/review/repo-doc-render.ts:17-18 and src/review/repo-skill-render.ts:16-17 change REPO\_DOC\_MARKER\_START/END and REPO\_SKILL\_MARKER\_START/END from the \`gittensory-\*\` marker text to \`loopover-\*\` — any repo's AGENTS.md/skill doc already written with the old markers \(per generated-doc-refresh.ts's start/end pair matching\) will no longer be recognized as the machine-generated section on the next refresh, causing it to be treated as manual content \(skipped\) or duplicated with a second, differently-marked generated block, contradicting the PR's own 'comment-only, no behavior change' claim and the exact desync concern it raises for LOOPOVER\_NATIVE\_SOURCE.

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

CI checks failing

• validate
• validate-tests (6)
• validate-tests (5)

Signal	Result	Evidence
Code review	❌ 2 blockers	1 reviewer
Linked issue	✅ No-issue rationale	PR body explains why no issue is linked.
Related work	⚠️ 1 scoped overlap	Top overlaps are listed below; lower-confidence bulk is hidden.
Change scope	❌ 8/20	High review scope from cached public metadata (no linked issue context).
Validation posture	✅ 25/25	PR body includes validation/test evidence.
Contributor workload	✅ 10/10	Author activity: 43 registered-repo PR(s), 35 merged, 385 issue(s).
Contributor context	✅ Confirmed Gittensor contributor	JSONbored; Gittensor profile; 43 PR(s), 385 issue(s).
Gate result	❌ Blocking	Repo-configured hard blocker found.
Improvement	⚠️ ℹ️ None detected	risk: low · value: none — No structural-improvement signals were detected for this PR. LLM value judgment: minor — The bulk of the diff is low-risk, mechanical prose cleanup consistent with the stated rebrand-epic intent, but its actual value is undercut by an unflagged data-affecting change to generated-doc markers that the PR didn't account for.

Review context

• Author: JSONbored
• Role context: owner (maintainer lane)
• Public audience mode: oss maintainer
• Lane context: Repository registration is not available in the local Gittensory cache.
• Public profile languages: Python, TypeScript, Ruby, Go, JavaScript, MDX, Shell, Solidity
• Official Gittensor activity: 43 PR(s), 385 issue(s).
• Related work: Titles/paths share 5 meaningful terms. (PR #5888)

Contributor next steps

• Treat this as maintainer-lane context rather than normal contributor-lane activity.
• Review top overlaps.
• Add a concise scope and risk note.
• No action.
• Check active issues and PRs before submitting.

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.

[BETA] Chat with Gittensory

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

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

Full command reference: https://gittensory.aethereal.dev/docs/gittensory-commands

_{🟩 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