fix(settings): authorize circuit-breaker hold labels via merge/close autonomy

[JSONbored]

Summary

• downgradeMergeToHold and downgradeCloseToHold (the accuracy/close-precision circuit breakers) drop a would-merge/would-close action and substitute a manual-review hold label. That substitute label was tagged autonomyClass: "review_state_label" — a separate, default-OFF autonomy class, independent of merge/close. The executor re-resolves autonomy per-action at execution time via autonomyClass ?? actionClass and denies the action if that class isn't acting.
• Net effect: a repo with only merge/close autonomy enabled (no explicit review_state_label opt-in, which is the documented minimal one-shot-mode config) hits the breaker, correctly drops the merge/close, but the substitute hold label is silently denied — the PR ends up unlabeled with no visible sign of why it stopped merging.
• Every other manual-review-label application in this same file already piggybacks on merge/close autonomy for exactly this reason (see the comment at agent-actions.ts around the guardrail-hold label) — the two circuit-breaker functions were the only ones that didn't follow that pattern. Fix: tag each breaker's substitute label with the disposition class it is actually downgrading (merge / close), matching every other call site.
• No issue filed — this is a small, self-evident, narrowly-scoped bug fix discovered via direct code investigation (tracing the executor's autonomy re-check into the two breaker functions and confirming the mismatch), not a reported incident.

Scope

• The PR title follows type(scope): short summary Conventional Commit format, for example fix(api): restore profile access checks.
• 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, or this is small enough that the summary explains why an issue is not needed.

Validation

• git diff --check
• npm run actionlint (via npm run test:ci)
• npm run typecheck
• npm run test:coverage locally (via npm run test:ci); the two changed lines are plain object-literal field values with no new branches, and the two new regression tests in test/unit/agent-actions.test.ts exercise them directly.
• npm run test:workers (via npm run test:ci)
• npm run build:mcp (via npm run test:ci)
• npm run test:mcp-pack (via npm run test:ci)
• npm run ui:openapi:check (via npm run test:ci) — no API/schema change in this PR
• npm run ui:lint (via npm run test:ci)
• npm run ui:typecheck (via npm run test:ci)
• npm run ui:build (via npm run test:ci)
• npm audit --audit-level=moderate
• New or changed behavior has unit/integration tests for new branches, fallback paths, and sanitizer boundaries — added a regression test for downgradeMergeToHold and one for downgradeCloseToHold, both exercising the default (review_state_label unset) case where the bug previously manifested. Also ran the full agent-approval-queue, agent-action-executor, precision-breakers-chain, and queue suites directly since they exercise these two functions end to end — all pass unchanged.

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 auth/session/CORS change.
• API/OpenAPI/MCP behavior is updated and tested where needed. — N/A, no API/OpenAPI/MCP surface changed.
• UI changes use live API data or real empty/error/loading states, not production mock/demo fallbacks. — N/A, no UI change.
• Visible UI changes include a UI Evidence section below. — N/A, no visible UI change.
• Public docs/changelogs are updated where needed. — N/A, no user-facing behavior change; internal-only labeling reliability fix.

Notes

• This is PR 1 of a small sequence auditing repo-policy config consistency; the other items surfaced by that audit turned out not to be real drift (verified against the current source) and are documented separately rather than acted on.

[superagent-security]

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

[loopover-orb]

Tip

🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩

✅ Gittensory review result - approve/merge recommended

_{Review updated: 2026-07-05 05:01:41 UTC}

2 files · 1 AI reviewer · no blockers · readiness 93/100 · CI green · clean

✅ Suggested Action - Approve/Merge

• safe to merge

Review summary
This change fixes the two breaker downgrades at the right layer: the synthetic manual-review label now inherits the disposition autonomy class being suppressed, so a repo with merge/close autonomy enabled and review_state_label unset still gets a visible hold. The added regression tests exercise real planner output for merge/close-only autonomy before calling the downgrade functions, so they do not fabricate the payload. I don't see a correctness blocker in the visible diff.

Nits — 3 non-blocking

• nit: test/unit/agent-actions.test.ts:986 and test/unit/agent-actions.test.ts:1097 stop at asserting the planned label's autonomyClass; an executor-level regression would more directly prove the documented autonomyClass ?? actionClass allow/deny behavior.
• test/unit/agent-actions.test.ts:986: consider extending one regression through executeAgentMaintenanceActions with review_state_label unset so the test proves the label posts under merge autonomy, not just that the downgrade tags it correctly.
• test/unit/agent-actions.test.ts:1097: mirror that executor-path assertion for close autonomy if the existing test helpers can stub the GitHub label mutation cheaply.

Signal	Result	Evidence
Code review	✅ No 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: 56 registered-repo PR(s), 46 merged, 416 issue(s).
Contributor context	✅ Confirmed Gittensor contributor	JSONbored; Gittensor profile; 56 PR(s), 416 issue(s).
Gate result	✅ Passing	No configured 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: not available
• Official Gittensor activity: 56 PR(s), 416 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 93.88%. Comparing base (3f8e024) to head (0a9326b).
⚠️ Report is 4 commits behind head on main.
✅ All tests successful. No failed tests found.

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main    #3363   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   93.88%   93.88%           
=======================================
  Files         280      280           
  Lines       30562    30562           
  Branches    11132    11132           
=======================================
  Hits        28694    28694           
  Misses       1211     1211           
  Partials      657      657           

Files with missing lines	Coverage Δ
src/settings/agent-actions.ts	95.93% <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.