feat(api): REST + CLI mirror for loopover_pr_outcome (#6747)

[RealDiligent]

Summary

• Add GET /v1/contributors/:login/pr-outcomes[?limit=N] with requireContributorAccess, backed by shared buildContributorPrOutcomes.
• Add stdio tool loopover_pr_outcome + shell CLI pr-outcomes that proxy the new REST route (stdio tool count 77 → 78).
• Cover route/auth/parity, CLI edge branches, OpenAPI artifact, and session self-scoping.
• Fix stale mcp-cli-draft-pr-body fixture expectation (gittensory → loopover) that was failing CI.

Closes #6747

Supersedes #6981 (auto-closed after validate-tests flake / openapi stale check).

Test plan

• Local vitest: routes-pr-outcomes, mcp-cli-pr-outcomes, mcp-cli-draft-pr-body
• CI validate-code + Codecov patch ≥99%

[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 93.72%. Comparing base (018e261) to head (631eecc).
⚠️ Report is 3 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #6996      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   89.25%   93.72%   +4.46%     
==========================================
  Files         688      689       +1     
  Lines       68491    68508      +17     
  Branches    18737    18740       +3     
==========================================
+ Hits        61135    64209    +3074     
+ Misses       5647     3302    -2345     
+ Partials     1709      997     -712     

Flag	Coverage Δ
shard-1	43.66% <15.78%> (-0.01%)	⬇️
shard-2	36.87% <42.10%> (-0.01%)	⬇️
shard-3	33.14% <68.42%> (+0.11%)	⬆️
shard-4	33.94% <100.00%> (?)
shard-5	32.10% <10.52%> (-0.01%)	⬇️
shard-6	45.85% <15.78%> (-0.02%)	⬇️

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	94.86% <100.00%> (+6.48%)	⬆️
src/mcp/server.ts	96.26% <100.00%> (+3.20%)	⬆️
src/openapi/schemas.ts	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
src/openapi/spec.ts	99.46% <100.00%> (+<0.01%)	⬆️
src/signals/contributor-pr-outcomes.ts	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)

... and 98 files with indirect coverage changes

[loopover-orb]

Tip

✅ LoopOver review result - approve/merge recommended

_{Review updated: 2026-07-17 17:50:27 UTC}

14 files · 1 AI reviewer · no blockers · readiness 80/100 · CI green · clean

✅ Suggested Action - Approve/Merge

• safe to merge

Review summary
This PR adds a REST route and CLI/stdio mirror for the existing loopover_pr_outcome MCP tool, refactoring the tool's inline logic into a shared buildContributorPrOutcomes() function used by both the MCP server and the new REST route — good DRY move that also gets covered by a parity test asserting REST/MCP/CLI all return identical payloads. The limit validation (integer, 1-100) is duplicated consistently across route, CLI, and OpenAPI schema, and the stale gittensory→loopover fixture fix is a legitimate unrelated-but-small CI fix called out honestly in the description. Auth uses the same requireContributorAccess self-scoping pattern as the sibling open-pr-monitor route, verified by a 403 cross-login test.

Nits — 5 non-blocking

• src/api/routes.ts:3339 and packages/loopover-mcp/bin/loopover-mcp.js: the `100`/`1`/`50` limit bounds are duplicated across route, CLI, and OpenAPI spec with no shared constant — fine for now but a future limit change requires touching three places in sync.
• packages/loopover-mcp/bin/loopover-mcp.js prOutcomesCli mixes login-resolution, limit-parsing, and output-formatting in one function (flagged at ~complexity 15) — consider extracting limit parsing like the route handler nearly duplicates.
• src/signals/contributor-pr-outcomes.ts: `attribution` is echoed directly from `delivery.body`, which is developer-authored text, not attacker input, so this is safe, but worth a one-line note confirming that assumption holds if the notification body ever becomes influenced by PR titles.
• Factor the `Number.isInteger(parsed) && parsed >= 1 && parsed <= 100` limit-validation logic (duplicated in src/api/routes.ts, packages/loopover-mcp/bin/loopover-mcp.js, and src/openapi/spec.ts's z.coerce schema) into one shared helper/schema.
• Consider trimming prOutcomesCli by extracting the `--limit` parsing into its own function, mirroring how limit validation is isolated in the route handler.

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	#6747
Related work	⚠️ 3 scoped overlaps	Top overlaps are listed below; lower-confidence bulk is hidden.
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: 402 registered-repo PR(s), 201 merged, 34 issue(s).
Contributor context	✅ Confirmed Gittensor contributor	RealDiligent; Gittensor profile; 402 PR(s), 34 issue(s).
Improvement	✅ Minor	risk: clean · value: minor

Review context

• Author: RealDiligent
• 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: 402 PR(s), 34 issue(s).
• Related work: Titles/paths share 6 meaningful terms. (issue #6744)
• Related work: Titles/paths share 6 meaningful terms. (issue #6746)
• Related work: Titles/paths share 6 meaningful terms. (issue #6980)
• Additional title-only matches omitted; title-only overlap does not block.

Contributor next steps

• Start here: Review top overlaps.
• 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.

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