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

[andriypolanski]

…on metadata

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

❌ Patch coverage is 93.93939% with 2 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 88.77%. Comparing base (5c5f461) to head (41f8297).
⚠️ Report is 8 commits behind head on main.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
packages/loopover-miner/lib/discover-cli.ts	93.93%	2 Missing ⚠️

❌ Your patch status has failed because the patch coverage (93.93%) is below the target coverage (99.00%). You can increase the patch coverage or adjust the target coverage.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #8555      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   89.58%   88.77%   -0.82%     
==========================================
  Files          97       98       +1     
  Lines       22706    22955     +249     
  Branches     3872     3960      +88     
==========================================
+ Hits        20341    20378      +37     
- Misses       2187     2399     +212     
  Partials      178      178              

Flag	Coverage Δ
backend	14.85% <93.93%> (?)

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	14.85% <93.93%> (ø)

[loopover-orb]

Caution

🛑 LoopOver review result - fixes required

_{Review updated: 2026-07-24 20:35:27 UTC}

3 files · no blockers · CI failing · unstable

🛑 Suggested Action - Fix Blockers

• AI review already in progress for this PR head: Another LoopOver pass is already running the AI review for this exact PR head. This pass is skipping to avoid a duplicate LLM call.

Review summary
AI review is already running for this PR head in another LoopOver pass. LoopOver is holding this PR for manual review until that pass completes.

Nits — 1 non-blocking

• AI review already in progress for this PR head — The gate is held for a human reviewer rather than passed automatically; it re-evaluates once the in-flight review completes or on the next update.

CI checks failing

• codecov/patch — 93.93% of diff hit (target 99.00%)

Decision drivers

• ✅ Code review — No blockers (No AI review summary)
• ⚠️ Gate result — Not blocking (Advisory; not blocking this PR.)

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

Linked issue satisfaction

Addressed
The diff widens recordEligibilityExclusionSignals' candidate type to carry labels/assignees/owner and adds a bounded buildEligibilityExclusionMetadata helper enforcing the exact 50/25/200 caps with truncated flag only on clamp and omission of absent/empty fields, wired into the real-run capture only (dry-run untouched, contribution-profile-filter.ts untouched, best-effort catch preserved).

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

[loopover-orb]

LoopOver is closing this pull request on the maintainer's behalf (CI is failing (codecov/patch)). This is an automated maintenance action — to pursue this change, please open a new pull request with the issues resolved. Closed PRs may be analyzed later to improve review accuracy, but they are not automatically reopened or re-reviewed.

[JSONbored]

Reopening: this PR was auto-closed on a phantom codecov/patch (0%/99%) failure — a CI bug (in-place package build output shadowing the .ts sources during the coverage run), not a problem with this PR. Fixed in #8564; updating the branch now to get a fresh run under the fixed workflow.

[JSONbored]

Issue has already been solved, closing.

[JSONbored]

Closing note: while the CI incident above was being fixed, your own resubmission of this exact change (#8561) was reviewed and merged, and issue #8544 is closed by it — this earlier version is superseded by your landed PR (that's also why the branch conflicts with main now). Nothing wrong with this PR's content; the work shipped.