feat(enrichment): floating-promise / unhandled-rejection analyzer

[bohdansolovie]

Summary

Fixes #2023

• Add FloatingPromiseFinding and a local floatingPromise analyzer that flags newly-added promise-shaped calls (fetch, Promise.*, new Promise, or *Async suffix) when the statement is neither awaited, returned, voided, nor same-line .then/.catch-chained
• Precision-first: TS/JS non-test files only, bare expression statements (assignments skipped), string literals stripped before matching (including chain detection), capped at 25 findings
• .finally() alone is not treated as handled (it does not consume rejection)
• Register the analyzer in the REES registry with render/docs/metadata; sync src/review/enrichment-analyzer-names.ts and generated .env.example / UI metadata
• Add review-enrichment/test/floating-promise.test.ts covering flagged calls, safe handled variants, .finally() and string-literal .catch( regressions, non-JS skip, cap, and brief rendering

Test plan

• cd review-enrichment && npm run build && npm run metadata && node --test test/floating-promise.test.ts test/analyzer-registry.test.ts
• CI validate-code

Made with Cursor

[superagent-security]

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

[loopover-orb]

Warning

🟨🟨🟨🟨🟨🟨🟨🟨🟨🟨🟨🟨

⏸️ Gittensory review result - manual review recommended

_{Review updated: 2026-07-05 15:50:02 UTC}

10 files · 1 AI reviewer · no blockers · readiness 62/100 · CI green · clean

⏸️ Suggested Action - Manual Review

Review summary
Clean, well-scoped addition of a floating-promise heuristic analyzer. The core logic is purely functional, correctly anchored to added lines only, and the precision-first design (bare expression statements, no type-checker dependency) is sound. Wiring is complete: type, registry descriptor, render hook, BriefFindings field, enrichment-analyzer-names, analyzer-metadata.json, UI metadata, and .env.example all updated in lock-step. The `.finally()`-is-not-handled semantics are correct and explicitly tested. String-literal stripping via `codeOnly` correctly defuses the `fetch("/.catch(")` regression. No blockers.

Nits — 6 non-blocking

• floating-promise.ts:54 — the callee regex `^((?:[a-zA-Z_$][\w$]*(?:\.[a-zA-Z_$][\w$]*)*))\ s*\(` nests `[\w$]*` inside `(?:...)*` inside a capture group; while the disjoint character classes (word vs dot) make catastrophic backtracking unlikely in practice, an adversarially crafted long line like `aaaaaa.bbbbbb.cccccc` with no trailing `(` forces the engine to unwind the entire dot-chain — rewrite as the simpler `^([\w$]+(?:\.[\w$]+)*)\s*\(` which is equivalent for valid identifiers and removes the ambiguity entirely.
• floating-promise.ts — `codeOnly(line)` is called redundantly: once at the top of `detectFloatingPromise` (line ~65) and again inside `extractLeadingCallCallee` (line ~49); hoist the result and pass `code` into the extractor to avoid double-processing.
• floating-promise.ts:31 — the magic literal `3` in `call.slice(0, MAX_CALL_CHARS - 3)` is the length of the ellipsis string `"..."` — name it (`const ELLIPSIS = "..."; ... call.slice(0, MAX_CALL_CHARS - ELLIPSIS.length) + ELLIPSIS`) so the coupling is explicit.
• floating-promise.test.ts — no test exercises the `AbortSignal` aborted path in `scanPatchForFloatingPromise` or `scanFloatingPromise`; the throw-on-abort branch is untested.
• floating-promise.test.ts — the cross-file findings-cap at the `scanFloatingPromise` level (the `MAX_FINDINGS - findings.length` budget passed per file) has no test; only the single-file `scanPatchForFloatingPromise` cap is covered.
• 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	✅ Linked	#2023
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	❌ 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: 318 registered-repo PR(s), 186 merged, 9 issue(s).
Contributor context	✅ Confirmed Gittensor contributor	bohdansolovie; Gittensor profile; 318 PR(s), 9 issue(s).
Gate result	✅ Passing	No configured blocker found.

Review context

• Author: bohdansolovie
• Role context: outside_contributor
• Public audience mode: oss maintainer
• Lane context: Repository registration is not available in the local Gittensory cache.
• Public profile languages: not available
• Official Gittensor activity: 318 PR(s), 9 issue(s).
• Related work: Titles/paths share 7 meaningful terms. (issue #2023, issue #2029)
• Related work: Titles/paths share 7 meaningful terms. (issue #2023, issue #2033)
• Related work: Titles/paths share 7 meaningful terms. (issue #2023, issue #2026)

Contributor next steps

• Review top overlaps.
• Add a concise scope and risk note.
• Await review-lane availability.
• Refresh registry data or choose a registered active repo.
• Check active issues and PRs before submitting.

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 93.09%. Comparing base (7dd3836) to head (cb6b9a3).

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main    #3527   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   93.09%   93.09%           
=======================================
  Files         301      301           
  Lines       31450    31450           
  Branches    11483    11483           
=======================================
  Hits        29279    29279           
  Misses       1517     1517           
  Partials      654      654           

Files with missing lines	Coverage Δ
src/review/enrichment-analyzer-names.ts	100.00% <ø> (ø)

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

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

[loopover-orb]

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