feat(review): add linked-issue satisfaction advisory + unified-comment section

[JSONbored]

Summary

• Adds the pure, AI-backed linked-issue satisfaction assessment core (feat(review): pure linked-issue satisfaction assessment builder (advisory finding) #2172): given the already-fetched linked-issue text plus a PR's title/body/diff, composes a bounded prompt and parses a model's response into a public-safe {status, rationale, confidence} result. Prompt composition and response parsing only -- no gate wiring, no AI-call orchestration, no disposition change.
• Renders a resolved result as an additive, collapsed "Linked issue satisfaction" section in the unified review comment (feat(review): render linked-issue satisfaction as an advisory section in the unified comment #2174), reusing the existing collapsible + angle-escape helpers. Absent result omits the section entirely (byte-identical); review.comment_verbosity: quiet drops it like every other decorative collapsible.
• Both slices are fail-safe: no issue text, unparseable model output, or a below-floor unaddressed call all yield no finding -- the model can never manufacture an unearned "you didn't fix this." Presentation is additive only and never changes status or the gate verdict.

Closes #2172, Closes #2174 -- both deliverables fully implemented in this PR. Advances #1961 (not closed -- the AI-call orchestration and any future gate.linkedIssueSatisfaction disposition wiring remain separate, maintainer-only slices).

Scope

• The PR title follows type(scope): short summary Conventional Commit format.
• This PR is focused and does not mix unrelated backend, UI, MCP, docs, dependency, and deploy changes.
• This follows CONTRIBUTING.md and does not reintroduce GitHub Pages, VitePress, site/, or CNAME.
• I linked an issue (Advances AI linked-issue satisfaction assessment #1961; implements feat(review): pure linked-issue satisfaction assessment builder (advisory finding) #2172 and feat(review): render linked-issue satisfaction as an advisory section in the unified comment #2174), or this is small enough that the summary explains why an issue is not needed.

Validation

• git diff --check
• npm run actionlint
• npm run typecheck
• npm run test:coverage locally -- 100% branch coverage on both changed files (src/services/linked-issue-satisfaction.ts, src/review/unified-comment.ts's new lines)
• npm run test:workers
• npm run build:mcp
• npm run test:mcp-pack
• npm run ui:openapi:check
• npm run ui:lint
• npm run ui:typecheck
• npm run ui:build
• npm audit --audit-level=moderate
• New or changed behavior has unit/integration tests for new branches, fallback paths, and sanitizer boundaries

Safety

• No secrets, wallet details, hotkeys, coldkeys, user PATs, private keys, raw trust scores, private rankings, or private maintainer evidence are exposed.
• Public GitHub text stays sanitized, low-noise, and does not imply compensation guarantees or optimization tactics.
• Auth, cookie, CORS, GitHub App, Cloudflare, or session changes include negative-path tests. (N/A -- no such changes in this PR.)
• API/OpenAPI/MCP behavior is updated and tested where needed. (N/A -- no API/OpenAPI/MCP surface touched.)
• UI changes use live API data or real empty/error/loading states, not production mock/demo fallbacks. (N/A -- no frontend UI touched; this only affects the GitHub PR comment renderer.)
• Visible UI changes include a UI Evidence section below. (N/A -- no visible frontend/UI change; this renders inside a GitHub PR comment, not the web app.)
• Public docs/changelogs are updated where needed; changelogs are only edited for release-prep PRs.

Notes

• src/services/linked-issue-satisfaction.ts mirrors src/services/ai-slop.ts's pure-helper shape (prompt builder + response parser + finding builder, no I/O) -- the actual AI-call orchestration (budget, provider selection, usage accounting) is intentionally out of scope for feat(review): pure linked-issue satisfaction assessment builder (advisory finding) #2172 per its own deliverables checklist.
• The confidence floor (LINKED_ISSUE_SATISFACTION_CONFIDENCE_FLOOR = 0.5) only gates the unaddressed verdict, matching the issue's fail-safe requirement ("low confidence never emits 'unaddressed'"); addressed/partial are unaffected since a false-positive "looks addressed" is a lower-stakes error.

[superagent-security]

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

[codecov]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 93.42%. Comparing base (ca6a6d7) to head (3ebfcd2).
✅ All tests successful. No failed tests found.

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main    #3833   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   93.41%   93.42%           
=======================================
  Files         326      327    +1     
  Lines       32855    32897   +42     
  Branches    12035    12051   +16     
=======================================
+ Hits        30691    30733   +42     
  Misses       1530     1530           
  Partials      634      634           

Files with missing lines	Coverage Δ
src/review/unified-comment.ts	99.51% <100.00%> (+0.01%)	⬆️
src/services/linked-issue-satisfaction.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.

[loopover-orb]

Important

🟪🟪🟪🟪🟪🟪🟪🟪🟪🟪🟪🟪

🔍 Gittensory is reviewing…

AI analysis is in progress. This comment will update when the review is complete.

_{🟩 Safe / merged · 🟦 Advisory · 🟨 Held for review · 🟥 Blocked / closed · 🟪 Reviewing}