fix(review): exclude current head from auto-pause count

[JSONbored]

Motivation

• Prevent a regression where the auto-pause threshold for AI reviews counted the current head and thereby skipped reuse of already-published cached AI findings, which could remove blockers from later gate evaluations.

Description

• Change countPublishedAiReviewHeads to accept an optional currentHeadSha and exclude it from the SQL COUNT(DISTINCT head_sha) so the threshold only counts prior published heads.
• Wire the current advisory head (headSha) into resolveAutoReviewSkipForPullRequest so the helper can exclude the active head when deciding a pause.
• Add a regression unit test that asserts the current published head is excluded from the pause threshold and retain the old null/no-current-head behavior.
• Update an existing auto-review-wiring test to expect the current head SHA is forwarded to the count helper.

Testing

• Ran the targeted unit tests with npx vitest run test/unit/ai-review-cache.test.ts test/unit/auto-review-wiring.test.ts, and all tests in those files passed.
• Ran TypeScript typecheck with npm run typecheck, which passed.
• Attempted a full coverage run (npm run test:coverage) and a coverage-enabled run of the two targeted tests; the targeted tests ran cleanly but a full global coverage run was not completed in this environment (global coverage threshold check did not finish here).
• npm audit --audit-level=moderate could not complete due to the registry returning 403 Forbidden in this environment.

---

Codex Task

[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: 2026-07-06 06:30:24 UTC}

4 files · 1 AI reviewer · 2 blockers · readiness 93/100 · CI green · clean

⏸️ Suggested Action - Manual Review

• No linked issue detected — If this PR is intended to solve an issue, link it explicitly in the PR body.
• Maintainer requires a linked issue — Link the relevant issue (for example Closes #123) before opening the PR.

Review summary
This PR fixes a real regression: countPublishedAiReviewHeads previously counted the current PR head among 'already reviewed' heads for the auto_pause_after_reviewed_commits threshold, which could trigger a premature pause and cause cached blocker findings from the current head to be skipped/dropped from gate evaluation. The fix adds an optional currentHeadSha parameter, conditionally appends 'AND head_sha != ?' to the SQL COUNT(DISTINCT head_sha) query with correctly ordered bind params, and wires args.headSha through resolveAutoReviewSkipForPullRequest at the actual call site. Tests cover both the exclusion behavior and the prior null/no-current-head behavior, and an existing wiring test was updated to assert headSha is forwarded to the count helper — this is a root-cause fix at the source query, not a symptom patch.

Nits — 4 non-blocking

• src/db/repositories.ts: currentHeadSha is only excluded when truthy, so an empty-string head_sha (if that could ever occur) would silently fall back to counting it — worth a comment noting head_sha is always non-empty by contract.
• The regression test in ai-review-cache.test.ts is a good addition, but consider also asserting the SQL bind argument order directly (e.g. via a prepare spy) to guard against future param-order regressions rather than relying solely on end-to-end count assertions.
• Consider extracting the conditional-clause-building pattern (`currentHeadClause` + conditional bind array) into a small helper if this exclude-current-head pattern is likely to recur elsewhere in repositories.ts.
• Double check other callers of countPublishedAiReviewHeads (if any exist beyond resolveAutoReviewSkipForPullRequest) also pass currentHeadSha where applicable, since the parameter is optional and easy to forget at a new call site.

Concerns raised — review before merging

• No linked issue detected — If this PR is intended to solve an issue, link it explicitly in the PR body.
• Maintainer requires a linked issue — Link the relevant issue (for example Closes #123) before opening the PR.

Signal	Result	Evidence
Code review	❌ 2 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	✅ 25/25	PR body includes validation/test evidence.
Contributor workload	✅ 10/10	Author activity: 54 registered-repo PR(s), 46 merged, 439 issue(s).
Contributor context	✅ Confirmed Gittensor contributor	JSONbored; Gittensor profile; 54 PR(s), 439 issue(s).
Gate result	❌ Blocking	Repo-configured hard blocker found.

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: Python, TypeScript, JavaScript, Ruby, Go, Kotlin, MDX, Shell
• Official Gittensor activity: 54 PR(s), 439 issue(s).
• PR-specific overlap: none found.

Contributor next steps

• Treat this as maintainer-lane context rather than normal contributor-lane activity.
• Explain no-issue PR.
• No action.
• 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 93.36%. Comparing base (1c0a636) to head (6b96a7d).
⚠️ Report is 9 commits behind head on main.
✅ All tests successful. No failed tests found.

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main    #3719   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   93.36%   93.36%           
=======================================
  Files         315      315           
  Lines       32204    32206    +2     
  Branches    11812    11814    +2     
=======================================
+ Hits        30066    30068    +2     
  Misses       1507     1507           
  Partials      631      631           

Files with missing lines	Coverage Δ
src/db/repositories.ts	96.52% <100.00%> (+<0.01%)	⬆️
src/queue/processors.ts	94.07% <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.