feat(mcp): CLI mirror for loopover_draft_pr_body

[RealDiligent]

Summary

• Move buildPublicPrBodyDraft into @loopover/engine (host re-exports from engine source so Codecov patch coverage attributes correctly).
• Register loopover_draft_pr_body stdio tool with optional format=markdown.
• Bump stdio tool-count pin 76 → 77; CLI parity tests + fixture enrichment.

Closes #6741.

Supersedes #6972 (closed on codecov/patch after a dist-vs-source re-export miss).

Test plan

• CI validate-code / unit tests green
• codecov/patch ≥ 99%
• Tool count 77; draft markdown matches engine buildPublicPrBodyDraft

[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 93.71%. Comparing base (4966070) to head (acbbb80).
⚠️ Report is 1 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main    #6974   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   93.71%   93.71%           
=======================================
  Files         686      686           
  Lines       68392    68399    +7     
  Branches    18730    18735    +5     
=======================================
+ Hits        64093    64100    +7     
  Misses       3302     3302           
  Partials      997      997           

Flag	Coverage Δ
shard-1	43.75% <8.69%> (-0.01%)	⬇️
shard-2	36.94% <100.00%> (+<0.01%)	⬆️
shard-3	32.90% <8.69%> (+0.09%)	⬆️
shard-4	33.94% <72.46%> (+0.08%)	⬆️
shard-5	32.14% <76.81%> (+<0.01%)	⬆️
shard-6	45.77% <76.81%> (+<0.01%)	⬆️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

Files with missing lines	Coverage Δ
packages/loopover-engine/src/pr-body-draft.ts	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)

[loopover-orb]

Tip

✅ LoopOver review result - approve/merge recommended

_{Review updated: 2026-07-17 17:09:14 UTC}

7 files · 1 AI reviewer · no blockers · readiness 77/100 · CI green · clean

✅ Suggested Action - Approve/Merge

• safe to merge

Review summary
This PR moves buildPublicPrBodyDraft from src/services/pr-body-draft.ts into @​loopover/engine's source (not dist), re-exports it from the old path for backward compatibility, and wires a new loopover_draft_pr_body stdio tool with an optional format=markdown mode. It closes #6741 and correctly follows the stated pattern of importing engine source (not dist) so Codecov patch coverage attributes properly — the same fix that made the superseded #6972 fail. The moved code is a verbatim relocation (diff shows identical logic, just re-typed against a structural PrBodyDraftSource instead of Pick<LocalBranchAnalysis,...>), tool-count pin and CLI parity test are updated consistently, and the new stdio handler mirrors the existing prepare_pr_packet fetch-then-transform pattern.

Nits — 5 non-blocking

• packages/loopover-engine/src/pr-body-draft.ts defines PrBodyDraftSource as a hand-written structural type instead of Pick<>-ing from LocalBranchAnalysis like the old src/services version did — worth confirming a future field rename in LocalBranchAnalysis won't silently drift from this duplicated shape.
• The external brief's magic-number flags (3, 3, 8) are pre-existing slice/limit constants carried over unchanged from the original file, not new — not worth a named constant refactor in this PR.
• src/services/pr-body-draft.ts re-export comment claims parity with src/rules/predicted-gate.ts's pattern; worth a quick sanity check that pattern is still accurate for future readers.
• Consider exporting PrBodyDraftSource's individual nested types (e.g. prPacket, baseFreshness shapes) if other engine consumers will need to construct partial analyses, to avoid re-deriving the same structural shape elsewhere.
• packages/loopover-mcp/bin/loopover-mcp.js's draftPrBodyShape spreads currentBranchShape then adds format — same shape pattern used by other CLI mirrors, good consistency to keep.

Decision drivers

• ✅ Code review — No blockers (1 reviewer)
• ✅ Gate result — Passing (No configured blocker found.)

Context & advisory signals — never blocks the verdict

Signal	Result	Evidence
Linked issue	✅ Linked	#6741
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	✅ 25/25	PR body includes validation/test evidence.
Contributor workload	✅ 10/10	Author activity: 402 registered-repo PR(s), 201 merged, 34 issue(s).
Contributor context	✅ Confirmed Gittensor contributor	RealDiligent; Gittensor profile; 402 PR(s), 34 issue(s).
Improvement	✅ Minor	risk: clean · value: minor · LLM: moderate

Linked issue satisfaction

Addressed
The PR moves buildPublicPrBodyDraft into @​loopover/engine's source (re-exported from src for Codecov attribution) and registers a new loopover_draft_pr_body stdio tool with a format=markdown option, mirroring the loopover_prepare_pr_packet precedent exactly as requested, plus adds parity/unit tests and updates the tool-count pin.

Review context

• Author: RealDiligent
• Role context: outside_contributor
• Public audience mode: oss maintainer
• Lane context: Repository is configured for direct PR review.
• Public profile languages: Python, JavaScript, Ruby, Svelte, TypeScript, Markdown, MDX
• Official Gittensor activity: 402 PR(s), 34 issue(s).
• Related work: Titles/paths share 7 meaningful terms. (issue #6744, issue #6741)
• Related work: Titles/paths share 7 meaningful terms. (issue #6743, issue #6741)
• Related work: Titles/paths share 7 meaningful terms. (issue #6747, issue #6741)
• Additional title-only matches omitted; title-only overlap does not block.

Contributor next steps

• Start here: Review top overlaps.
• Then work through the remaining 3 steps in the Signals table above.

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.

🧪 Chat with LoopOver

Ask LoopOver a question about this PR directly in a comment — grounded only in the same cached, public-safe facts shown above, never a new claim.

• @loopover ask <question> answers contribution-quality Q&A with source citations and freshness.
• @loopover chat <question> answers in natural prose from cached decision-pack facts via local inference (maintainer/collaborator; read-only).
• A plain-language @loopover mention with a real question is routed to the closest matching read-only command automatically — no exact syntax required.

Full command reference: https://loopover.ai/docs/loopover-commands

🧪 Experimental — new and may change.

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

• Re-run LoopOver review

[loopover-orb]

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