test(ui): cover formatReversalEventType's three branches directly

[nghetien]

The formatReversalEventType helper in reversal-health-card-model.ts has three branches (reversal_reverted, reversal_reopened, and a generic fallback), but only reversal_reopened was exercised, and only indirectly through a ReversalHealthCard render assertion. This adds direct unit tests for all three branches, including the previously-uncovered "merge reverted" case.

Closes #8665

Validation

• npx vitest run src/components/site/app-panels/reversal-health-card.test.tsx — 9/9 passed
• npm --workspace @loopover/ui run test — 88 files / 626 tests passed
• npm --workspace @loopover/ui-miner run test — 37 files / 393 tests passed
• npm test (root suite) — 1156 files / 21627 tests passed
• npm run test:workers — 3/3 passed
• npm run typecheck, npm run actionlint, and the full drift/manifest/reference check suite — all green
• npx turbo run lint --filter=@loopover/ui --filter=@loopover/ui-miner — 0 errors

[superagent-security]

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

[loopover-orb]

Tip

✅ LoopOver review result - approve/merge recommended

_{Review updated: 2026-07-26 05:16:23 UTC}

1 file · 1 AI reviewer · no blockers · readiness 95/100 · CI green · clean

✅ Suggested Action - Approve/Merge

• safe to merge

Review summary
This is a small, well-targeted test-only addition that adds three direct unit tests for formatReversalEventType's three branches (reversal_reverted, reversal_reopened, and the generic underscore-to-space fallback), closing the coverage gap noted in issue #8665 where only the reopened case was exercised indirectly. The import and expected string outputs align with the referenced component usage (formatReversalEventType is already used and exported from reversal-health-card-model.ts, consistent with the render assertion 'close reopened · merged' seen in the existing ReversalHealthCard tests). No production code is touched, so risk is minimal.

Nits — 2 non-blocking

• The fallback test only checks one example input ('some_new_event'); consider also asserting on an edge case like a single-word/no-underscore input if the model function has different behavior there.
• Consider grouping the three new assertions using it.each for conciseness, though the current explicit form is also fine and arguably more readable.

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	#8665
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: 3 registered-repo PR(s), 1 merged, 0 issue(s).
Contributor context	✅ Confirmed Gittensor contributor	nghetien; Gittensor profile; 3 PR(s), 0 issue(s).
Improvement	ℹ️ Insufficient signal	risk: clean · value: insufficient-signal

Linked issue satisfaction

Addressed
The diff adds three direct unit tests asserting formatReversalEventType's behavior for "reversal_reverted", "reversal_reopened", and a generic fallback case, exactly matching all three Deliverables in the issue.

Review context

• Author: nghetien
• Role context: outside_contributor
• Public audience mode: oss maintainer
• Lane context: Repository is configured for direct PR review.
• Public profile languages: Dart, JavaScript, Python, CSS, C#, C++, TypeScript
• Official Gittensor activity: 3 PR(s), 0 issue(s).
• PR-specific overlap: none found.

Contributor next steps

• Start here: Triage stale or unlinked PRs.

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.

Visual preview

Route	Viewport	Before (production)	After (this PR's preview)	Diff
/	desktop	before /	after /	—
/	mobile	before / (mobile)	after / (mobile)	—

Click any thumbnail to open the full-size screenshot. Before = production · After = this PR's preview deploy.

Scroll preview

Route	Before (production)	After (this PR's preview)
/	before / (scroll)	after / (scroll)

A short scroll-through clip (desktop) — click either thumbnail to open the full animation. Evidence for scroll-linked behavior a single screenshot can't show.

_{🟩 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]

This pull request changes UI/visual code but its screenshot evidence is incomplete. Every required viewport × theme combination needs its own before/after image pair in a labeled table row (e.g. "Desktop · Light | before | after"). Still missing: Desktop · Dark, Tablet · Dark, Mobile · Dark.

Please resubmit with the remaining rows filled in.

See https://github.com/JSONbored/loopover/blob/main/.claude/skills/contributing-to-loopover/SKILL.md for the exact format and examples. This is an automated maintenance action.