docs(claude): teach contributor-pipeline-gardening the gate's explicit-text-only enforcement

[JSONbored]

Summary

• The loopover-orb review gate only checks a PR against what its linked issue explicitly states, never implied intent — confirmed 2026-07-15 when a contributor PR (docs(selfhost): add combined ORB + AMS quickstart #6011) satisfied docs(selfhost): document a combined ORB + AMS quickstart (running both compose files together) #5996's narrative Context while missing its actual point (added a raw .md file instead of a website .tsx page).
• Adds a dedicated reference.md section on this, tightens the milestone-discipline guidance (don't create a new milestone reflexively — also confirmed the hard way this session), and marks the unified AMS+ORB harness item as already scoped (docs(selfhost): document a combined ORB + AMS quickstart (running both compose files together) #5996, epic Epic: port AMS's raw-markdown operator guides to proper website docs pages #6012) so future gardening runs don't re-discover it as unscoped.

Test plan

• Docs-only change under .claude/skills/** — no code/schema/UI touched, outside Codecov's src/** coverage scope.

[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 07:03:50 UTC}

2 files · 1 AI reviewer · 1 blocker · readiness 95/100 · CI green · clean

⏸️ Suggested Action - Manual Review

Review summary
This is a docs-only update to internal maintainer skill files (.claude/skills/contributor-pipeline-gardening) that records lessons learned from two recent incidents: the gate only enforces explicit issue text (not implied intent, per PR #6011/#5996), and milestone creation should default to existing buckets (per the #6012 scoping episode). The content is internally consistent, cross-references (#5996, #6012, #6011) are coherent across both edited files, and the guidance is actionable and specific. No code, schema, or tests are touched, matching the stated test plan of a docs-only change outside coverage scope.

Nits — 5 non-blocking

• The new 'gate only enforces explicit text' section in reference.md is fairly long and duplicates some framing already in SKILL.md's step 4 — could be tightened, but this is a style call for an internal doc.
• reference.md now asserts Epic: port AMS's raw-markdown operator guides to proper website docs pages #6012 is 'scoped and issue-backed' with specific structure (11-issue docs-porting body of work per SKILL.md) — worth double-checking those sub-issues actually exist as described before other automation trusts this claim at face value.
• Consider linking directly to Epic: port AMS's raw-markdown operator guides to proper website docs pages #6012's sub-issue list (once stable) rather than describing its shape in prose, so this doc doesn't drift if the sub-issue count changes.
• Nothing else needed — the diff is well-scoped and internally coherent for its stated purpose.
• Diff looks like trivial or whitespace-only churn — Reduce whitespace-only or formatting-only churn and keep the diff focused on substantive changes.

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.

📋 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.

Signal	Result	Evidence
Code review	❌ 1 blocker	1 reviewer
Linked issue	✅ No-issue rationale	PR body explains why no issue is linked.
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	ℹ️ Insufficient signal	risk: low · value: insufficient-signal · LLM: 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: Python, TypeScript, Ruby, Go, JavaScript, MDX, Shell, Solidity
• 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 1 step 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