fix(review): wire skipAutomationBotAuthors into .loopover.yml config

[JSONbored]

Summary

• skipAutomationBotAuthors ("inherit" | "off" | "enabled", mirrors moderationGateMode's exact shape) controls whether AI review, gate evaluation, and public-surface publish get skipped entirely for a PR/event genuinely triggered by a known automation bot (release-please, Renovate, Dependabot). It had a DB column and a dashboard/API write path, but was never wired into the .loopover.yml parser -- scripts/check-docs-drift.mjs even carried an explicit comment recording this as "an intentional scope choice", modeled directly on agentGlobalFreezeOverride's DB-only shape. That's the same DB-as-second-source-of-truth pattern already removed from agentGlobalFreezeOverride itself -- this closes the identical gap here.
• Adds skipAutomationBotAuthors to FocusManifestSettings's Pick list + parseSettingsOverride in packages/loopover-engine/src/focus-manifest.ts (and its engine-parity twin type in packages/loopover-engine/src/types/manifest-deps-types.ts), so a global or per-repo .loopover.yml can set it directly -- no DB write required.
• Removes it from NOT_YML_CONFIGURABLE_SETTINGS_FIELDS in scripts/check-docs-drift.mjs and documents it in both .loopover.yml.example and config/examples/loopover.full.yml, so the existing "every RepositorySettings field needs SOME yml mention" drift check now covers it like every other setting.

Test plan

• npm run test:ci (full local gate) green
• npm audit --audit-level=moderate -- 0 vulnerabilities
• New parseFocusManifest/resolveEffectiveSettings test covering valid override, DB-value-survives-when-omitted, and invalid-enum-warns (mirrors the existing moderationGateMode test)
• Updated check-docs-drift-script.test.ts: the old "excluded even with zero yml mention" case no longer includes this field; added a new case proving a zero-yml-mention regression now fails the drift check
• Verified via lcov: both new lines / both branches fully hit

[superagent-security]

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

[loopover-orb]

Warning

🟨🟨🟨🟨🟨🟨🟨🟨🟨🟨🟨🟨

⏸️ LoopOver review result - manual review recommended

_{Review updated: 2026-07-15 06:15:52 UTC}

7 files · 1 AI reviewer · 2 blockers · readiness 91/100 · CI green · clean

⏸️ Suggested Action - Manual Review

Review summary
This PR wires `skipAutomationBotAuthors` into the `.loopover.yml` parsing path by adding it to `FocusManifestSettings`'s Pick list, `parseSettingsOverride` (via `normalizeOptionalEnum` with the same `inherit`/`off`/`enabled` shape as `moderationGateMode`), the engine-parity type, and both yml example files. The drift-check exclusion set is correctly shrunk with a clear explanatory comment, and the test updates flip the old 'excluded' case to a new 'must fail if undocumented' case plus add a matching parse/resolve test with valid-override, DB-survives-when-omitted, and invalid-enum-warns coverage — mirroring the existing `moderationGateMode` test exactly. The mechanical pattern-following here is solid and internally consistent; I can't see `resolveEffectiveSettings`'s overlay implementation or the actual consumer (gate/review skip logic) in this diff, so I can't independently verify the DB row is truly overridden end-to-end beyond what the new test already asserts.

Nits — 5 non-blocking

• The new comment block in scripts/check-docs-drift.mjs:90-106 is fairly verbose for a config note — consider trimming the historical (feat(review): skip AI review, gate evaluation, and publish for known automation-bot PRs #4659, agentGlobalFreezeOverride) narrative into a shorter pointer comment now that the field is no longer an exception.
• Verify the actual gate/skip-evaluation call site (not shown in this diff) reads from `resolveEffectiveSettings` output rather than the raw DB `RepositorySettings` row, since that's the code path this PR is meant to unblock.
• packages/loopover-engine/src/types/manifest-deps-types.ts:340 — confirm the JSDoc default (`inherit`) matches the actual DB column default so the docs don't drift from schema.
• Consider adding a short note in the PR description or code comment pointing to the exact consumer file/line that reads `skipAutomationBotAuthors` post-resolve, to make the end-to-end wiring easy to verify in future review.
• Since this mirrors `moderationGateMode` closely, a quick DRY pass extracting the shared 'inherit/off/enabled per-repo override of a global env default' parsing helper could reduce duplication across the growing family of these fields (nit-level, not blocking).

Concerns raised — review before merging

• No linked issue detected — If this PR is intended to solve an issue, link it explicitly in the PR body.
• Maintainer requires a linked issue — Link the relevant issue (for example Closes #123) before opening the PR.

📋 Copy for AI agents — paste into your coding agent

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

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

2. Maintainer requires a linked issue — Link the relevant issue (for example `Closes #123`) before opening the PR.

Signal	Result	Evidence
Code review	❌ 2 blockers	1 reviewer
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.
Change scope	✅ 20/20	Low 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, 367 issue(s).
Contributor context	✅ Confirmed Gittensor contributor	JSONbored; Gittensor profile; 43 PR(s), 367 issue(s).
Gate result	❌ Blocking	Repo-configured hard blocker found.
Improvement	✅ Minor	risk: clean · value: minor

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: not available
• Official Gittensor activity: 43 PR(s), 367 issue(s).
• PR-specific overlap: none found.

Contributor next steps

• Start here: Treat this as maintainer-lane context rather than normal contributor-lane activity.
• Then work through the remaining 2 steps in the Signals table above.

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://gittensory.aethereal.dev/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