fix(extension): handle a rejected sendMessage in loadOpportunityBadge

[dhgoal]

Summary

Closes #6189

• content.js's loadOpportunityBadge awaited chrome.runtime.sendMessage with no try/catch, unlike every other message call site in this extension (background.js:19-21, options.js:78-94, options.js:99-113).
• sendMessage genuinely rejects under MV3 — service worker asleep/restarting, "Extension context invalidated". Because mountOpportunityBadge calls this as a floating void promise, a rejection became an unhandled rejection and left the badge <aside> in the DOM permanently hidden with zero user-visible feedback.
• It now cleans up through the same container.remove() the function already uses for its other failure paths — the graceful behaviour the issue asks for.
• background.js and options.js are untouched; their handling was already correct, as the issue states.

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 (this workspace's typecheck is its node --check lint gate — run and passing)
• npm run test:coverage locally; codecov/patch requires ≥99% coverage of the lines AND branches you changed (aim for 100% on your diff so CI variance does not fail near the threshold). Global coverage is a non-blocking trend with a loose 90% backstop, not the gate.
• 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:

• Verified the regression test actually catches the bug: with the try/catch reverted (and the test seam left in place, to isolate the fix itself), the new test fails with "promise rejected 'Error: Extension context invalidated' instead of resolving" — precisely the unhandled rejection described — and passes with the fix.
• This workspace's own gate is green: npx vitest run --coverage passes 22 tests across 4 files, with coverage 100% statements / 100% functions / 100% lines / 95.79% branches, all above vitest.config.ts's thresholds (98/98/98/94). npm run lint (node --check on all five scripts) passes.
• The measured baseline is unchanged: content.js is deliberately outside coverage.include (the README defers it pending a jsdom mount harness), so this adds real regression coverage without touching the thresholds or the deferral policy.
• Root-level UI/MCP/worker suites are untouched by an extension-only change; leaving them 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.

No UI Evidence section: there is no new rendered state to screenshot. This strictly removes a broken one — on failure the badge container is now cleanly removed instead of persisting as a hidden orphan element, which is the extension's existing behaviour for every other failure path.

Notes

loadOpportunityBadge is added to the existing __loopoverMinerContentInternals test seam so the test can drive it directly. content.js mounts the badge at import time only when location.pathname is a GitHub issue URL, so importing it on a non-issue path loads the module free of DOM side effects — that keeps this focused on the sendMessage failure path and needs none of the jsdom mount harness the README defers.

Closes #6189

[superagent-security]

🚨 Contributor flagged. Click here for more info: Superagent Dashboard

[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: 2026-07-16 07:41:50 UTC}

2 files · 1 AI reviewer · no blockers · CI green · unstable

⏸️ Suggested Action - Manual Review

Review summary
This is a small, correctly-scoped fix wrapping chrome.runtime.sendMessage in try/catch in loadOpportunityBadge, cleaning up the badge container via the existing container.remove() path on rejection instead of leaving an unhandled rejection. It closes the linked issue #6189, matches the error-handling convention already used in background.js and options.js, and ships three focused unit tests covering the reject path, the pre-existing not-ok path, and the success path.

Nits — 4 non-blocking

• The exported loadOpportunityBadge in content.js:78-83 is now test-only surface (guarded by __LOOPOVER_MINER_EXTENSION_TEST__), so consider a brief comment noting it's exposed solely for testing, consistent with the other exported internals.
• The catch block swallows the error without logging it (content.js:50-55); consider a console.debug/warn so a genuinely broken extension context isn't silently invisible during manual debugging.
• Consider also asserting on the error message/logging behavior if you add any diagnostic logging to the catch block in a follow-up.
• The test file's loadContentInternals helper could be reused/exported if future content.js tests need the same import-and-stub pattern, but that's fine to defer until there's a second consumer.

Flagged checks (non-blocking)

• Contributor trust — Contributor flagged for review

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	#6189
Related work	✅ No active overlap found	No same-issue or scoped active PR overlap found.
Change scope	❌ 8/20	High 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: 113 registered-repo PR(s), 64 merged, 36 issue(s).
Contributor context	✅ Confirmed Gittensor contributor	dhgoal; Gittensor profile; 113 PR(s), 36 issue(s).
Improvement	✅ Minor	risk: clean · value: minor

Review context

• Author: dhgoal
• Role context: outside_contributor
• Public audience mode: oss maintainer
• Lane context: Repository is configured for direct PR review.
• Public profile languages: not available
• Official Gittensor activity: 113 PR(s), 36 issue(s).
• PR-specific overlap: none found.

Contributor next steps

• Start here: Add a concise scope and risk note.
• 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://loopover.ai/docs/loopover-commands

🧪 Experimental — new and may change.

Visual preview

Route	Viewport	Before (production)	After (this PR's preview)	Diff
/	desktop	before /	after /	—
/	mobile	before / (mobile)	after / (mobile)	—

Click any thumbnail to open the full-size screenshot. Before = production · After = this PR's preview deploy.

_{🟩 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 approves — the gate is satisfied and CI is green.