docs(miner): rename gittensory prose to loopover in miner/mcp packages

[JSONbored]

Summary

• Part of the gittensory→loopover rebrand (Epic: complete the gittensory -> loopover rebrand (full cutover, no dual-support) #5705), phase 8b: rename brand-name prose across packages/loopover-miner/** and packages/loopover-mcp/** (23 files).
• Includes a few real (non-comment) values with no external consumer besides this repo's own code: packages/loopover-miner/bin/loopover-miner-mcp.js's MCP server self-reported name field, cross-repo-evaluation.js's GITTENSOR_ASSUMPTION failure-category value (referenced everywhere via the exported symbol, never a hardcoded literal), and status.js's monorepo-workspace-fallback path that pointed at a nonexistent ../../gittensory-engine/package.json sibling directory (the real package is packages/loopover-engine).
• If this lands before or after test(miner): rename gittensory-miner/ams prose to loopover-miner/ams (batch 3) #5888 (which independently fixed the same status.js lines while unblocking its own test batch), the overlapping lines are identical text — a clean no-op on rebase either way, no conflict.
• Deliberately left untouched: defaultApiUrl/legacyDefaultApiUrls in loopover-mcp.js (the gittensory-api.aethereal.dev/gittensory-api.zeronode.workers.dev domain aliases — explicitly named "legacy", deliberate backward-compat).

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 a currently open issue this PR resolves — N/A, maintainer-authored rebrand-epic cleanup (Epic: complete the gittensory -> loopover rebrand (full cutover, no dual-support) #5705), no linked-issue gate applies to owner PRs.

Validation

• git diff --check
• Comment/string-literal-only diff outside packages/**'s own JS (no TS build step for these files)

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.
• API/OpenAPI/MCP behavior is updated and tested where needed. — N/A, comment-only plus internal-only value renames.
• UI changes use live API data or real empty/error/loading states. — N/A, no UI changes.
• Visible UI changes include a UI Evidence section. — N/A, no UI changes.
• Public docs/changelogs are updated where needed; changelogs are only edited for release-prep PRs (none touched here).

Notes

• One of several batched PRs covering the bulk-prose portion of rebrand epic Epic: complete the gittensory -> loopover rebrand (full cutover, no dual-support) #5705.

[superagent-security]

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

[loopover-orb]

Warning

🟨🟨🟨🟨🟨🟨🟨🟨🟨🟨🟨🟨

⏸️ LoopOver review result - manual review recommended

_{Review updated: 2026-07-14 22:19:58 UTC}

23 files · 1 AI reviewer · 1 blocker · readiness 77/100 · CI green · unstable

⏸️ Suggested Action - Manual Review

Review summary
This is a straightforward continuation of the gittensory→loopover rebrand across miner/mcp packages: comments, JSDoc, log strings, and a few narrowly-scoped real values (MCP server name, an internal failure-category enum value, and a fallback path in status.js that previously pointed at a nonexistent ../../gittensory-engine directory and now correctly points at packages/loopover-engine). The status.js path fix is a genuine bug fix, not just cosmetic. The one real risk is that this diff renames exported symbols (scanPositiveGittensoryAssumptions→scanPositiveLoopoverAssumptions, and the summary field withoutGittensoryConfig→withoutLoopoverConfig) in both cross-repo-evaluation.js and its .d.ts, but shows zero corresponding test-file changes despite this being a heavily-covered module.

Blockers

• packages/loopover-miner/lib/cross-repo-evaluation.js: renaming the exported `scanPositiveGittensoryAssumptions` to `scanPositiveLoopoverAssumptions` and the summary key `withoutGittensoryConfig` to `withoutLoopoverConfig` is a public API rename with no test-file updates shown in the diff — if any existing test imports the old names (likely, given this module's test-heavy history per Cross-repo evaluation harness #4788), the suite will break with an import/property-access failure.

Nits — 6 non-blocking

• packages/loopover-miner/lib/cross-repo-evaluation.js:18 — the `GITTENSOR_ASSUMPTION` object key itself is left as-is while its string value changes to "loopover_assumption"; worth a one-line note in the PR description on why the key wasn't renamed too, for consistency.
• packages/loopover-miner/lib/cross-repo-evaluation.d.ts — type declarations were updated to match the renamed JS symbols, so at least the JS/TS surface stays internally consistent.
• Grep the miner package's test files for `scanPositiveGittensoryAssumptions` and `withoutGittensoryConfig` before merging to confirm no test breakage from the rename.
• Consider calling out the `scanPositiveGittensoryAssumptions` rename explicitly in the PR description's 'real values' bullet list, since it's a symbol rename rather than pure prose.
• Code changes lack test evidence — Add focused regression tests or explain why existing coverage is sufficient.
• Pull request duplicates other open work — Check for an existing pull request or issue covering this change and coordinate or consolidate before continuing.

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.

📋 Copy for AI agents — paste into your coding agent

Fix the following blocker(s) from this PR review:

1. No linked issue detected — If this PR is intended to solve an issue, link it explicitly in the PR body.

Signal	Result	Evidence
Code review	❌ 1 blocker	1 reviewer
Linked issue	✅ No-issue rationale	PR body explains why no issue is linked.
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 (no linked issue context).
Validation posture	✅ 25/25	PR body includes validation/test evidence.
Contributor workload	✅ 10/10	Author activity: 43 registered-repo PR(s), 35 merged, 385 issue(s).
Contributor context	✅ Confirmed Gittensor contributor	JSONbored; Gittensor profile; 43 PR(s), 385 issue(s).
Gate result	❌ Blocking	Repo-configured hard blocker found.
Improvement	⚠️ ℹ️ None detected	risk: low · value: none — No structural-improvement signals were detected for this PR.

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: 43 PR(s), 385 issue(s).
• Related work: Titles/paths share 10 meaningful terms. (PR #5897)
• Related work: Titles/paths share 9 meaningful terms. (PR #5895)
• Related work: Titles/paths share 9 meaningful terms. (PR #5896)
• Additional title-only matches omitted; title-only overlap does not block.

Contributor next steps

• Treat this as maintainer-lane context rather than normal contributor-lane activity.
• Review top overlaps.
• Add a concise scope and risk note.
• Triage stale or unlinked PRs.
• No action.
• Check active issues and PRs before submitting.

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.

[BETA] Chat with Gittensory

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

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

Full command reference: https://gittensory.aethereal.dev/docs/gittensory-commands

_{🟩 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