fix(queue): bound linked-issue webhook fanout by queuing staggered per-PR jobs

[JSONbored]

Motivation

• The issues webhook handler synchronously re-reviewed every open PR linking the changed issue, causing an unbounded, expensive fanout that can exhaust GitHub/queue/worker resources and bypass the rate-limit-aware per-PR path.
• Issue-side signals should wake linked PRs promptly while honoring the existing per-PR rate-limit/backpressure model and preserving coalescing semantics for bursts on the same PR.

Description

• Rewrote maybeReReviewOnLinkedIssueChange in src/queue/processors.ts to enqueue bounded per-PR agent-regate-pr jobs (one job per linked PR) instead of calling the expensive reReviewStoredPullRequest inline, and staggered enqueues by index to reuse the sweep's backpressure behavior.
• Capped the fanout to SWEEP_MAX_PRS so an issue-side event cannot synchronously schedule more work than the sweep budget.
• Kept the dedicated issue-side coalesce (issueLinkedPrReReviewCoalesced) and trailing re-review scheduling (scheduleTrailingIssueLinkedReReview) behavior intact so same-PR bursts still coalesce and the latest state is captured after the window.
• Updated test/unit/queue.test.ts to assert the new behavior and added regression tests that verify no inline GitHub work is performed by the issue handler, the fanout is capped and staggered, and trailing/coalesced job retry/dedupe semantics remain correct.

Testing

• Ran git diff --check with no issues reported.
• Ran npm run typecheck, which completed successfully with no type errors.
• Ran unit tests focused on the changed behavior with npx vitest run test/unit/queue.test.ts -t "issue" --reporter=dot, and the targeted tests passed locally (issue-related tests covering capping, enqueueing, coalescing, and trailing retry/dedupe passed).
• Attempted npm run test:ci and npm audit --audit-level=moderate but the CI-level run and audit were blocked by external network/resolution issues in the environment (actionlint setup fallback and registry audit endpoint returned network/permission errors), so the full gated CI could not be completed in this session.
• No DB migrations or generated artifacts were required for this change.

---

Codex Task

[loopover-orb]

Warning

🟨🟨🟨🟨🟨🟨🟨🟨🟨🟨🟨🟨

⏸️ Gittensory review result - manual review recommended

_{Review updated: 2026-07-02 05:34:46 UTC}

2 files · 1 AI reviewer · no blockers · readiness 68/100 · CI pending · blocked

⏸️ Suggested Action - Manual Review

• Touches a guarded path — held for manual review

Review summary
The diff moves linked-issue webhook fanout out of the synchronous issue handler and into bounded, staggered per-PR queue jobs, while preserving the existing issue-side coalesce and trailing retry behavior. The changed tests exercise the important behavioral contract: no inline GitHub fetches on the issue path, capped fanout, staggered queue options, and trailing job dedupe/retry semantics. I do not see a reachable breaking defect in the provided diff.

Nits — 7 non-blocking

• nit: src/queue/processors.ts:2784 couples issue-side webhook fanout directly to SWEEP_MAX_PRS, whose documented budget is calibrated for scheduled sweeps; add a short comment or separate constant if that coupling is intentional.
• nit: src/queue/processors.ts:2786 silently drops linked PRs beyond the cap for this issue event; logging the capped count would make delayed convergence easier to diagnose.
• nit: test/unit/queue.test.ts:1544 repeats the same Queue capture stub across several issue-side tests; a small helper would make the assertions easier to maintain.
• src/queue/processors.ts:2784: document why the issue-webhook fanout should share the sweep budget rather than having its own issue-specific cap.
• src/queue/processors.ts:2786: consider emitting a structured log when linkedPrNumbers exceeds SWEEP_MAX_PRS so maintainers can see when issue-side wakes defer extra PRs to later backstops.
• Readiness score is below the configured threshold — Use the readiness panel as advisory maintainer context; the score does not block this PR.
• Touches a guarded path — held for manual review — A maintainer must review and merge this change.

Signal	Result	Evidence
Code review	✅ No blockers	1 reviewer
Linked issue	⚠️ Missing	No linked issue or no-issue rationale found.
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 (size label size:S; no linked issue context).
Validation posture	✅ 25/25	PR body includes validation/test evidence.
Contributor workload	✅ 10/10	Author activity: 65 registered-repo PR(s), 55 merged, 554 issue(s).
Contributor context	✅ Confirmed Gittensor contributor	JSONbored; Gittensor profile; 65 PR(s), 554 issue(s).
Gate result	⚠️ Not blocking	Advisory; not blocking this PR.

Review context

• Author: JSONbored
• Role context: owner (maintainer lane)
• 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: 65 PR(s), 554 issue(s).
• Related work: Titles/paths share 6 meaningful terms. (PR #2470)
• Related work: Titles/paths share 6 meaningful terms. (PR #2473)
• Related work: Titles/paths share 6 meaningful terms. (PR #2470, PR #2473)
• Additional title-only matches omitted; title-only overlap does not block.

Contributor next steps

• Treat this as maintainer-lane context rather than normal contributor-lane activity.
• Explain no-issue PR.
• Review top overlaps.
• Add a concise scope and risk note.
• Triage stale or unlinked PRs.
• No action.
• Link the issue being solved, or explicitly explain why this is a no-issue PR.
• 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 95.93%. Comparing base (8c63ec4) to head (1bbcfc6).
⚠️ Report is 21 commits behind head on main.
✅ All tests successful. No failed tests found.

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main    #2476   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   95.93%   95.93%           
=======================================
  Files         225      225           
  Lines       25338    25340    +2     
  Branches     9218     9219    +1     
=======================================
+ Hits        24308    24310    +2     
  Misses        417      417           
  Partials      613      613           

Files with missing lines	Coverage Δ
src/queue/processors.ts	91.74% <100.00%> (+<0.01%)	⬆️

... and 1 file with indirect coverage changes

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

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