fix(mcp): rename enrichment-analyzers resource URI to loopover://

[JSONbored]

Summary

• ENRICHMENT_ANALYZERS_URI was still gittensory://enrichment-analyzers, while its sibling FINDING_TAXONOMY_URI (added in the same MCP: add REST routes + CLI resource mirrors for finding-taxonomy and enrichment-analyzers #6620 PR) already uses loopover://finding-taxonomy — a straggler from the rebrand, not an intentional legacy reference (unlike the GITTENSORY_LEGACY_* check-run-name constants, nothing here is annotated as pre-rename/compat).
• Fixed in both the main server (src/review/enrichment-analyzers-taxonomy.ts, src/mcp/server.ts already referenced the constant so no change needed there) and the standalone @loopover/mcp CLI package (packages/loopover-mcp/bin/loopover-mcp.js), which independently registers the same resource.
• Updated the 4 test files whose assertions were pinned to the old literal value, plus two doc comments for consistency.
• Confirmed via git grep that zero references to the old URI remain anywhere in the tracked repo.

Scope

• Narrow, single-purpose change
• No secrets/private terms touched
• No changelog edit

Validation

• npx vitest run test/unit/enrichment-analyzers-taxonomy.test.ts test/unit/mcp-discovery.test.ts test/unit/mcp-enrichment-analyzers.test.ts test/unit/routes-taxonomy-mirrors.test.ts — 34/34 passing
• npm run typecheck — clean
• git grep -n "gittensory://enrichment-analyzers" — zero hits repo-wide

[superagent-security]

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

[codecov]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 93.63%. Comparing base (8cd0b24) to head (7ec9f69).
⚠️ Report is 7 commits behind head on main.
✅ All tests successful. No failed tests found.

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main    #6786   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   93.63%   93.63%           
=======================================
  Files         683      683           
  Lines       68148    68148           
  Branches    18703    18703           
=======================================
  Hits        63812    63812           
  Misses       3350     3350           
  Partials      986      986           

Flag	Coverage Δ
shard-1	43.66% <100.00%> (ø)
shard-2	36.83% <100.00%> (ø)
shard-3	32.74% <100.00%> (ø)
shard-4	34.67% <100.00%> (-0.01%)	⬇️
shard-5	31.00% <100.00%> (-0.01%)	⬇️
shard-6	45.67% <100.00%> (ø)

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

Files with missing lines	Coverage Δ
src/api/routes.ts	94.67% <ø> (ø)
src/review/enrichment-analyzers-taxonomy.ts	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)

[loopover-orb]

Warning

⏸️ LoopOver review result - manual review recommended

_{Review updated: 2026-07-17 06:44:13 UTC}

7 files · 1 AI reviewer · 2 blockers · CI green · clean

⏸️ Suggested Action - Manual Review

Review summary
This is a straightforward rename of the ENRICHMENT_ANALYZERS_URI constant and its literal usages from the stray `gittensory:​//enrichment-analyzers` to the consistent `loopover:​//enrichment-analyzers`, matching the sibling `loopover:​//finding-taxonomy` established in #6620. The change is applied consistently across the constant definition, the standalone MCP CLI package, test assertions, and doc comments, and the PR confirms via git grep that no old references remain. The two long-file size smells flagged in the brief are pre-existing file sizes unrelated to this diff's scope.

Nits — 4 non-blocking

• The `validate` and `validate-tests (6)` CI checks failed — worth confirming whether they're related to this rename or a pre-existing/flaky failure before merge, though this is a CI status note rather than a code defect.
• test/unit/mcp-enrichment-analyzers.test.ts:16 renames the client name string for consistency but this is purely cosmetic and has no functional effect on the test.
• Double check the failing `validate` and `validate-tests (6)` jobs aren't masking a missed reference to the old URI somewhere outside the files shown in this diff.
• Code changes lack test evidence — Add focused regression tests or explain why existing coverage is sufficient.

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.

Decision drivers

• ❌ Code review — 2 blockers (1 reviewer)
• ❌ Gate result — Blocking (Repo-configured hard blocker found.)

Context & advisory signals — never blocks the verdict

Signal	Result	Evidence
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: 33 registered-repo PR(s), 26 merged, 332 issue(s).
Contributor context	✅ Confirmed Gittensor contributor	JSONbored; Gittensor profile; 33 PR(s), 332 issue(s).
Improvement	ℹ️ None detected	risk: low · value: none

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: 33 PR(s), 332 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://loopover.ai/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

[cloudflare-workers-and-pages]

Deploying with    Cloudflare Workers

The latest updates on your project. Learn more about integrating Git with Workers.

Status	Name	Latest Commit	Preview URL	Updated (UTC)
✅ Deployment successful! View logs	loopover-ui	7ec9f69	Commit Preview URL Branch Preview URL	Jul 17 2026, 06:40 AM