feat(mcp): add loopover_file_incident_report write tool

[bitfathers94]

feat(mcp): add loopover_file_incident_report write tool

Mirror POST /v1/repos/:owner/:repo/pulls/:number/incident-reports over the
MCP surface so a maintainer-authenticated client can file a post-merge
incident report on a harmful rented-loop PR, closing the write-side gap next
to the already-wrapped maintainer-packet/reviewability read tools.

The handler replays the REST route exactly: maintainer-manage auth, the
PR-must-exist-and-be-merged validation, then recordPostMergeIncidentReport
with reporterKind "customer" and the calling actor, returning the same
{ ok, repoFullName, pullNumber, ...report } shape. The input body fields
(description/severity/mergedSha) are declared inline rather than spread from
routes.ts's postMergeIncidentReportSchema.shape, because routes.ts imports the
MCP server module before that schema is defined -- dereferencing .shape at
module-init would hit the circular-import temporal dead zone.

Closes #9298

Validation

Verified locally on this branch before opening:

• npm run typecheck
• npx turbo run build:tsc build:verify
• npm run test:coverage — patch coverage 100.0% of changed lines

[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 75.83%. Comparing base (09eb223) to head (98bf81b).

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #9365      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   75.38%   75.83%   +0.44%     
==========================================
  Files         275      276       +1     
  Lines       58023    59244    +1221     
  Branches     6181     6421     +240     
==========================================
+ Hits        43739    44925    +1186     
- Misses      14014    14027      +13     
- Partials      270      292      +22     

Flag	Coverage Δ
backend	97.13% <100.00%> (?)

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

Files with missing lines	Coverage Δ
src/mcp/server.ts	97.13% <100.00%> (ø)

[loopover-orb]

Tip

✅ LoopOver review result - approve/merge recommended

_{Review updated: 2026-07-27 14:39:26 UTC}

2 files · 1 AI reviewer · no blockers · readiness 98/100 · CI green · clean

✅ Suggested Action - Approve/Merge

• safe to merge

Review summary
This PR wires up an MCP tool that mirrors the existing REST incident-report route: same maintainer-manage gate, PR-must-exist-and-be-merged validation, and recordPostMergeIncidentReport persistence with reporterKind "customer". The inline shape duplication (instead of spreading routes.ts's schema) is well-justified by a documented circular-import issue, and the test suite exercises the success path, actor resolution for session vs static callers, both business-rejection paths, and the access-denial path with DB-side assertions that nothing was recorded. This is a narrow, well-targeted write-tool addition closing issue #9298.

Nits — 4 non-blocking

• src/mcp/server.ts:268-274 — the description/severity length limits and the mergedSha regex are hand-duplicated from postMergeIncidentReportSchema rather than derived from it; a future change to the REST schema's constraints won't propagate here, worth a comment noting they must be kept in sync manually.
• The magic numbers 4000 (description max) and 7/40 (sha hex length bounds) in the new fileIncidentReportShape aren't named constants, though this matches the existing inline style in the same file (e.g. WRITE_TOOL_TITLE_MAX elsewhere uses named constants, this doesn't).
• Consider exporting postMergeIncidentReportSchema's field-level validators (not the whole schema) from a shared module both routes.ts and server.ts can import without triggering the circular dependency, so the two definitions can't drift.
• src/mcp/server.ts:4382 — the fileIncidentReportShape duplication risk could be caught by a unit test asserting the MCP shape's bounds match the REST schema's bounds, preventing silent divergence.

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	#9298
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 (1 linked issue).
Validation posture	✅ 25/25	PR body includes validation/test evidence.
Contributor workload	✅ 10/10	Author activity: 65 registered-repo PR(s), 45 merged, 0 issue(s).
Contributor context	✅ Confirmed Gittensor contributor	bitfathers94; Gittensor profile; 65 PR(s), 0 issue(s).
Improvement	✅ Minor	risk: clean · value: minor · LLM: moderate

Linked issue satisfaction

Partially addressed
The PR adds loopover_file_incident_report with the required tool registration, category entry, ownerRepoPullShape-style input, PR existence/merged validation, recordPostMergeIncidentReport call, and matching response shape, plus tests for happy path, not-found, not-merged, and auth-rejection. However, it deviates from the issue's explicit requirement to reuse postMergeIncidentReportSchema's field-

Review context

• Author: bitfathers94
• Role context: outside_contributor
• Public audience mode: oss maintainer
• Lane context: Repository is configured for direct PR review.
• Public profile languages: TypeScript
• Official Gittensor activity: 65 PR(s), 0 issue(s).
• PR-specific overlap: none found.

Contributor next steps

• Keep the PR focused and include validation evidence before maintainer review.

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.