feat(miner): capture bounded candidate context in eligibility-exclusion metadata

[andriypolanski]

Summary

• Closes miner: capture bounded candidate context (labels/assignees/owner) in eligibility-exclusion fired-event metadata #8544
• Extends recordEligibilityExclusionSignals in discover-cli.ts so each real-run eligibility exclusion records bounded metadata on the fired event: labels, assignees, and owner (when present on the excluded candidate).
• Caps: 50 labels, 25 assignees, 200 characters per string; truncated: true only when a cap actually clamps; absent fields omitted (no null, no empty-array placeholders).
• Pure contribution-profile-filter.ts untouched; dry-run still records nothing; best-effort discipline preserved (metadata capture cannot abort discovery).

Scope

• The PR title follows type(scope): short summary Conventional Commit format, for example fix(api): restore profile access checks.
• 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 (e.g. Closes #123) — a linked open issue is required for every contributor PR.

Validation

• git diff --check
• npm run actionlint
• npm run typecheck
• npm run build:miner
• npx vitest run test/unit/miner-discover-cli-eligibility-metadata.test.ts test/unit/miner-discover-cli.test.ts -t "eligibility-exclusion signal tracking|buildEligibilityExclusionMetadata" — 13 passed
• CI-scoped Codecov simulation: npm run build:miner && npx vitest run test/unit/miner-discover-cli-eligibility-metadata.test.ts test/unit/miner-discover-cli.test.ts -t "eligibility-exclusion signal tracking|buildEligibilityExclusionMetadata" --coverage.all=false --coverage && npx diff-cover coverage/lcov.info --compare-branch=origin/main
• npm run test:coverage (full unsharded gate)
• npm run test:ci
• npm run test:workers
• npm run build:mcp
• npm run test:mcp-pack
• npm run ui:openapi:check
• npm run ui:lint
• npm run ui:typecheck
• npm run ui:build
• npm audit --audit-level=moderate
• New or changed behavior has unit/integration tests for new branches, fallback paths, and sanitizer boundaries

If any required check was skipped, explain why:

• Miner-only change (packages/loopover-miner/lib/discover-cli.ts). New unit tests import .ts via variable specifier (miner-discover-cli-eligibility-metadata.test.ts) so codecov/patch grades changed lines under --coverage.all=false. Full test:ci left to CI.

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.
• API/OpenAPI/MCP behavior is updated and tested where needed.
• UI changes use live API data or real empty/error/loading states, not production mock/demo fallbacks.
• Visible UI changes include a UI Evidence section below with JPG/JPEG or PNG screenshots arranged as organized, captioned, clickable thumbnails. SVG screenshots are not used as review evidence. Review-only screenshots or recordings are not committed to the repository.
• Public docs/changelogs are updated where needed; changelogs are only edited for release-prep PRs.

[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 89.09%. Comparing base (5c5f461) to head (0475f58).
⚠️ Report is 6 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #8561      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   89.58%   89.09%   -0.49%     
==========================================
  Files          97       98       +1     
  Lines       22706    22955     +249     
  Branches     3872     3960      +88     
==========================================
+ Hits        20341    20452     +111     
- Misses       2187     2292     +105     
- Partials      178      211      +33     

Flag	Coverage Δ
backend	44.57% <100.00%> (?)

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

Files with missing lines	Coverage Δ
packages/loopover-miner/lib/discover-cli.ts	44.57% <100.00%> (ø)

[loopover-orb]

Tip

✅ LoopOver review result - approve/merge recommended

_{Review updated: 2026-07-24 21:00:29 UTC}

2 files · 1 AI reviewer · no blockers · readiness 100/100 · CI green · clean

✅ Suggested Action - Approve/Merge

• safe to merge

Review summary
This PR adds `buildEligibilityExclusionMetadata` to bound and cap `labels`/`assignees`/`owner` context captured on real-run eligibility-exclusion signal events, wiring it into `recordEligibilityExclusionSignals` in `discover-cli.ts:396`. The capping/truncation logic is straightforward and correctly covered by the added unit tests (exact-boundary and over-boundary cases for both length and count caps), and it is deliberately not wired into the dry-run branch, matching the stated intent. Since `recordRuleFired`'s type already accepts `metadata` (confirmed by a passing typecheck), the call site change is safe; whether the underlying `signal-tracking-store`/ledger actually persists that field end-to-end isn't visible in this diff and isn't touched by it, so it's out of scope here.

Nits — 4 non-blocking

• discover-cli.ts:311 `boundedEligibilityMetadataStrings` silently drops non-string array entries without setting `truncated`, which is a defensible design choice but isn't called out in the doc comment above `buildEligibilityExclusionMetadata` (discover-cli.ts:340) — worth a one-line note so a future reader doesn't assume all clamping sets the flag.
• test/unit/miner-discover-cli-eligibility-metadata.test.ts — several `it` blocks assign `const log = vi.spyOn(console, "log")...` but never assert against `log` (e.g. the 'records nothing when nothing was excluded' and 'omits metadata entirely' cases); consider dropping the unused binding or asserting on it for those specific tests.
• discover-cli.ts:296-298 `EligibilityExclusionCaptureCandidate.owner` is typed as optional (`owner?: string`) even though every real candidate shape observed (`fanOutIssue`, `DiscoveryIndexCandidate`) always supplies `owner` as required — harmless since the guard handles it, but slightly looser typing than necessary.
• Consider adding a short repo-level note (or reusing the referenced calibration: capture bounded raw context (issueText/prTitle/prBody/diff) in linked_issue_scope_mismatch's fired-event metadata #8129/calibration: capture bounded raw context for the remaining isConfiguredGateBlocker codes, excluding secret_leak #8130 pattern doc) confirming the signal-tracking-store's underlying persistence layer already has a metadata column/serialization path, since that's the piece this PR depends on but doesn't itself touch.

Decision drivers

• ✅ Code review — No blockers (1 reviewer)
• ✅ Gate result — Passing (No configured blocker found.)

Context & advisory signals — never blocks the verdict

Signal	Result	Evidence
Linked issue	✅ Linked	#8544
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	✅ 25/25	PR body includes validation/test evidence.
Contributor workload	✅ 10/10	Author activity: 220 registered-repo PR(s), 139 merged, 22 issue(s).
Contributor context	✅ Confirmed Gittensor contributor	andriypolanski; Gittensor profile; 220 PR(s), 22 issue(s).
Improvement	✅ Minor	risk: clean · value: minor · LLM: moderate

Linked issue satisfaction

Addressed
The diff widens recordEligibilityExclusionSignals' candidate type to carry labels/assignees/owner and adds a pure buildEligibilityExclusionMetadata helper enforcing the exact caps (50 labels, 25 assignees, 200-char strings) with truncated:true only when clamped and omission of absent fields, wired only into discover-cli.ts without touching the pure filter module or the dry-run branch. Tests cover

Review context

• Author: andriypolanski
• Role context: outside_contributor
• Public audience mode: oss maintainer
• Lane context: Repository is configured for direct PR review.
• Public profile languages: Python, TypeScript, Rust, Cuda, JavaScript, Kotlin, MDX, Scala
• Official Gittensor activity: 220 PR(s), 22 issue(s).
• PR-specific overlap: none found.

Contributor next steps

• Keep the PR focused and include validation evidence before maintainer review.

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