fix(rag): index TypeScript .mts and .cts module sources

[jimcody1995]

Summary

• Add .mts and .cts to CODE_EXT_RE in src/review/rag.ts so RAG indexes TypeScript module sources instead of skipping them.
• isCodeFile in signals/local-branch.ts already treats these as source; RAG was the outlier, so PRs touching only .mts/.cts files got no retrieved code context.

Scope

• The PR title follows type(scope): short summary Conventional Commit format.
• This PR is focused and does not mix unrelated changes.
• This follows CONTRIBUTING.md.
• Small enough that no linked issue is needed.

Validation

• git diff --check
• npm run test:ci (includes actionlint, typecheck, test:coverage, workers, MCP, UI checks)
• npm audit --audit-level=moderate
• Unit tests cover .mts/.cts classification, filePriority, and isIndexablePath

If any required check was skipped, explain why:

• Full gate run as npm run test:ci on Node 22 before push.

Safety

• No secrets or private data exposed.
• No auth/API/UI behavior changes.
• N/A for UI Evidence — backend RAG classifier only.

UI Evidence

N/A — no visible UI change.

Notes

Conflict avoidance: Touches only src/review/rag.ts and test/unit/rag.test.ts. Zero file overlap with open PRs (#3316 dart classifiers, #3304 mega, #3340 engine, #3339/#3338/#3337/#3333 enrichment, #3315/#3313/#3310 selfhost, #3314 miner, #3305 enrichment-wire, #3281 grafana, #3255 queue). Should merge cleanly after any of those land without rebase.

Made with Cursor

[superagent-security]

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

[gittensory-orb]

Warning

🟨🟨🟨🟨🟨🟨🟨🟨🟨🟨🟨🟨

⏸️ Gittensory review result - manual review recommended

_{Review updated: 2026-07-05 04:19:53 UTC}

2 files · 1 AI reviewer · no blockers · readiness 73/100 · CI green · clean

⏸️ Suggested Action - Manual Review

Review summary
This is a focused RAG classifier parity fix: adding `mts` and `cts` to `CODE_EXT_RE` makes `classifyRepoFile`, `filePriority`, and `isIndexablePath` treat TypeScript module sources as code. The tests exercise the real exported classifier path rather than fabricating an impossible state, and the change matches the existing `.mts`/`.cts` handling in related source-file classifiers. I do not see a reachable correctness defect in this diff.

Nits — 3 non-blocking

• nit: `test/unit/rag.test.ts:50` only checks `filePriority` for `.mts` and `isIndexablePath` for `.cts`; add the complementary assertions if you want the unit test to document both public helpers for both new extensions.
• In `test/unit/rag.test.ts:50`, consider adding `expect(filePriority("src/setup.cts")).toBe(0);` and `expect(isIndexablePath("src/loader.mts")).toBe(true);` so the test states the intended behavior symmetrically for both extensions.
• Readiness score is below the configured threshold — Use the readiness panel as advisory maintainer context; the score does not block this PR.

Signal	Result	Evidence
Code review	✅ No blockers	1 reviewer
Linked issue	⚠️ Missing	No linked issue or no-issue rationale found.
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 (no linked issue context).
Validation posture	❌ 5/25	Preflight is holding this PR: the review lane is unavailable, so it is not ready for automated review.
Contributor workload	✅ 10/10	Author activity: 46 registered-repo PR(s), 23 merged, 0 issue(s).
Contributor context	✅ Confirmed Gittensor contributor	jimcody1995; Gittensor profile; 46 PR(s), 0 issue(s).
Gate result	✅ Passing	No configured blocker found.

Review context

• Author: jimcody1995
• Role context: outside_contributor
• Public audience mode: oss maintainer
• Lane context: Repository registration is not available in the local Gittensory cache.
• Public profile languages: TypeScript, JavaScript
• Official Gittensor activity: 46 PR(s), 0 issue(s).
• PR-specific overlap: none found.

Contributor next steps

• Explain no-issue PR.
• Await review-lane availability.
• Refresh registry data or choose a registered active repo.
• Link the issue being solved, or explicitly explain why this is a no-issue PR.

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.

_{🟩 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 Gittensory, a quiet PR intelligence layer for OSS maintainers.

• Re-run Gittensory review

[codecov]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 93.88%. Comparing base (01e96c6) to head (bb9d123).
⚠️ Report is 6 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main    #3341   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   93.88%   93.88%           
=======================================
  Files         280      280           
  Lines       30534    30534           
  Branches    11120    11120           
=======================================
  Hits        28666    28666           
  Misses       1211     1211           
  Partials      657      657           

Files with missing lines	Coverage Δ
src/review/rag.ts	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• 📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

[gittensory-orb]

Gittensory approves — the gate is satisfied and CI is green.