fix(queue): queue all issue-linked PR regates

[JSONbored]

Motivation

• The issue-side wake path previously truncated linked-PR fanout with .slice(0, SWEEP_MAX_PRS), leaving PRs beyond the cap un-queued and susceptible to stale public gate/check state after issue label/assignment changes.
• This produced a correctness/security regression where some linked PRs could continue to show passing gate state until the slower periodic sweep reached them.

No issue: found and fixed as part of a broader review-stack reliability sweep; a self-contained follow-up didn't seem worth its own tracking issue.

Description

• Removed the slice(0, SWEEP_MAX_PRS) truncation in maybeReReviewOnLinkedIssueChange so every open PR that links the affected issue is enqueued for re-gating instead of dropping the tail (file: src/queue/processors.ts).
• Preserved asynchronous, staggered enqueue semantics by keeping the per-PR delaySeconds send logic so the webhook does not perform expensive inline reviews (env.JOBS.send usage retained).
• Updated the regression test in test/unit/queue.test.ts to seed SWEEP_MAX_PRS + 2 linked PRs and assert that all linked PRs are enqueued and that no inline GitHub fetch occurs (fetchCount remains zero).

Follow-up (review feedback)

The initial version of this PR removed the fan-out cap entirely, which the Gittensory review correctly flagged as reintroducing the unbounded-REST-fan-out risk SWEEP_MAX_PRS exists to prevent (a popular/tracking issue linked from hundreds of PRs could enqueue that many staggered ~9-REST-GET re-gates from one webhook). Added ISSUE_WAKE_MAX_PRS (src/settings/agent-sweep.ts): a separate, larger one-shot budget for this handler, since it fires once per issue event rather than recurring every ~2 minutes like the periodic sweep SWEEP_MAX_PRS is sized for. A new regression test proves the cap actually bounds a large fan-out.

Testing

• npm run typecheck — clean
• npx vitest run test/unit/queue.test.ts — 672/672 passed

[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: 2026-07-07 12:45:44 UTC}

3 files · 2 blockers · readiness 100/100 · 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.

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	No AI review summary
Linked issue	✅ No-issue rationale	PR body explains why no issue is linked.
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: 51 registered-repo PR(s), 43 merged, 570 issue(s).
Contributor context	✅ Confirmed Gittensor contributor	JSONbored; Gittensor profile; 51 PR(s), 570 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 is configured for direct PR review.
• Public profile languages: Python, TypeScript, JavaScript, Ruby, Go, Kotlin, MDX, Shell
• Official Gittensor activity: 51 PR(s), 570 issue(s).
• PR-specific overlap: none found.

Contributor next steps

• Treat this as maintainer-lane context rather than normal contributor-lane activity.
• 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 93.58%. Comparing base (bb7f8ed) to head (56a94bf).
⚠️ Report is 1 commits behind head on main.
✅ All tests successful. No failed tests found.

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main    #3989   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   93.58%   93.58%           
=======================================
  Files         382      382           
  Lines       35532    35533    +1     
  Branches    13028    13028           
=======================================
+ Hits        33251    33252    +1     
  Misses       1618     1618           
  Partials      663      663           

Files with missing lines	Coverage Δ
src/queue/processors.ts	94.86% <ø> (ø)
src/settings/agent-sweep.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.