feat(engine): add a stable, versioned getTrackRecordSummary read API by lourincedaging0-commits · Pull Request #6316 · JSONbored/loopover

lourincedaging0-commits · 2026-07-16T01:30:58Z

Summary

Groundwork for #6208 (reputation-bridge spec), part of the #6206 AMS+ORB synergy epic. Today AMS's calibration/track-record data is read ad-hoc with no single documented contract a future consumer could rely on. This adds one.

getTrackRecordSummary(input): TrackRecordSummaryReadResult in @loopover/engine — a thin, versioned wrapper over the existing computeTrackRecordSummary, returning { version, summary } under a fixed envelope (TRACK_RECORD_SUMMARY_READ_VERSION) so a consumer can depend on one shape regardless of how TrackRecordSummary evolves.
Read-only; adds no score/ranking fields — preserves the same public-safe boundary the summary itself keeps.
Exported from the package barrel alongside the existing track-record APIs.

Tests

packages/loopover-engine/test/track-record-summary.test.ts adds a populated case (asserts the envelope carries exactly computeTrackRecordSummary's output, with the right version and merge/close counts) and an empty/no-history case (default-disabled summary, zeroed counts). Verified passing locally via node --test (30/30).

Closes #6246.

Wraps the existing computeTrackRecordSummary in a single documented, versioned envelope (TRACK_RECORD_SUMMARY_READ_VERSION + the computed summary) so a future consumer (JSONbored#6208's reputation bridge) can depend on one fixed read contract regardless of how TrackRecordSummary evolves. Read-only, adds no score/ranking fields — preserves the summary's existing public-safe boundary. Closes JSONbored#6246.

superagent-security · 2026-07-16T01:31:06Z

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

superagent-security · 2026-07-16T01:31:33Z

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

loopover-orb · 2026-07-16T01:37:23Z

Warning

⏸️ LoopOver review result - manual review recommended

_{Review updated: 2026-07-16 04:27:16 UTC}

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

⏸️ Suggested Action - Manual Review

Review summary
This adds a thin, versioned passthrough wrapper (`getTrackRecordSummary`) around the existing `computeTrackRecordSummary`, plus a version constant and type, exported from the package barrel. The implementation is trivial and correct — it just returns `{ version, summary }` with no logic of its own — and the two new tests actually exercise the real function (populated and empty/no-history cases), asserting the envelope matches `computeTrackRecordSummary`'s real output rather than a fabricated shape.

Nits — 4 non-blocking

The function is a pure 1-line passthrough with no validation or transformation of its own, so the JSDoc block is disproportionately long relative to the code — consider trimming it once the reputation-bridge consumer (Spec: bridge ORB's submitter-reputation signal with AMS's calibration/track-record data #6208) actually materializes and its real constraints are known.
TRACK_RECORD_SUMMARY_READ_VERSION is hardcoded to `1` with no runtime path yet that could bump it — verify there's a plan (e.g. in Spec: bridge ORB's submitter-reputation signal with AMS's calibration/track-record data #6208) for how a future version 2 envelope would actually be produced/consumed, since right now it's an unused affordance.
If Spec: bridge ORB's submitter-reputation signal with AMS's calibration/track-record data #6208 is still speculative, consider landing this wrapper directly alongside the first real consumer instead of as standalone groundwork, to avoid dead exported surface area sitting unused in the meantime.
Add a brief note in the JSDoc or PR description about what a non-additive envelope change would look like in practice, so the version-bump comment has a concrete example to point to later.

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	#6246
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: 99 registered-repo PR(s), 44 merged, 5 issue(s).
Contributor context	✅ Confirmed Gittensor contributor	lourincedaging0-commits; Gittensor profile; 99 PR(s), 5 issue(s).
Improvement	✅ Minor	risk: clean · value: minor

Review context

Author: lourincedaging0-commits
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: 99 PR(s), 5 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://gittensory.aethereal.dev/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 approves — the gate is satisfied and CI is green.

lourincedaging0-commits requested a review from JSONbored as a code owner July 16, 2026 01:30

superagent-security Bot added the contributor:flagged Contributor flagged for review by trust analysis. label Jul 16, 2026

github-actions Bot deployed to preview/pr-6316 July 16, 2026 01:33 View deployment

loopover-orb Bot added the gittensor:feature Gittensor-scored feature linked to a feature issue — scores a 0.25x multiplier. label Jul 16, 2026

loopover-orb Bot assigned lourincedaging0-commits Jul 16, 2026

loopover-orb Bot approved these changes Jul 16, 2026

View reviewed changes

JSONbored approved these changes Jul 16, 2026

View reviewed changes

JSONbored merged commit 2958302 into JSONbored:main Jul 16, 2026
8 of 9 checks passed

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Uh oh!

feat(engine): add a stable, versioned getTrackRecordSummary read API#6316

feat(engine): add a stable, versioned getTrackRecordSummary read API#6316
JSONbored merged 1 commit into
JSONbored:mainfrom
lourincedaging0-commits:feat/engine-track-record-read-api

lourincedaging0-commits commented Jul 16, 2026

Uh oh!

superagent-security Bot commented Jul 16, 2026

Uh oh!

superagent-security Bot commented Jul 16, 2026

Uh oh!

loopover-orb Bot commented Jul 16, 2026 •

edited

Loading

⏸️ LoopOver review result - manual review recommended

Uh oh!

loopover-orb Bot left a comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

2 participants

Uh oh!

Conversation

lourincedaging0-commits commented Jul 16, 2026

Summary

Tests

Uh oh!

superagent-security Bot commented Jul 16, 2026

Uh oh!

superagent-security Bot commented Jul 16, 2026

Uh oh!

loopover-orb Bot commented Jul 16, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

⏸️ LoopOver review result - manual review recommended

Uh oh!

loopover-orb Bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

2 participants

loopover-orb Bot commented Jul 16, 2026 •

edited

Loading