fix(services): warn when contributor evidence-graph outcomes are capped

[joaovictor91123]

Summary

• Add an outcomes-cap warning to buildContributorEvidenceGraph, matching the existing repos/labels/paths pattern.
• Cover the new branch with a fixture that exceeds CONTRIBUTOR_EVIDENCE_GRAPH_MAX_OUTCOMES and asserts the warning.

Closes #8887

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 a currently open issue this PR resolves (e.g. Closes #123) — a linked open issue is required for every contributor PR.

Validation

• git diff --check
• npm run actionlint
• npm run typecheck
• npm run test:coverage locally; codecov/patch requires ≥99% coverage of the lines AND branches you changed (aim for 100% on your diff so CI variance does not fail near the threshold). Global coverage is a non-blocking trend with a loose 90% backstop, not the gate.
• npm run test:workers
• npm run build:mcp
• npm run test:mcp-pack
• npm run ui:openapi:check
• npm run ui:lint
• npm run ui:typecheck
• npm run ui:build
• npm audit --audit-level=moderate
• New or changed behavior has unit/integration tests for new branches, fallback paths, and sanitizer boundaries

If any required check was skipped, explain why:

• Full suite not re-run locally (Node 24 vs engines Node 22). Diff is one warning branch plus a dedicated unit test; CI is source of truth.

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.
• API/OpenAPI/MCP behavior is updated and tested where needed.
• UI changes use live API data or real empty/error/loading states, not production mock/demo fallbacks.
• Visible UI changes include a UI Evidence section below with JPG/JPEG or PNG screenshots arranged as organized, captioned, clickable thumbnails. SVG screenshots are not used as review evidence. Review-only screenshots or recordings are not committed to the repository.
• Public docs/changelogs are updated where needed; changelogs are only edited for release-prep PRs.

UI Evidence

N/A — no visible UI changes.

Notes

[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 90.65%. Comparing base (ad5f3bf) to head (9fb7217).
⚠️ Report is 7 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #8950      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   90.56%   90.65%   +0.09%     
==========================================
  Files          96       97       +1     
  Lines       22490    22721     +231     
  Branches     3884     3966      +82     
==========================================
+ Hits        20367    20597     +230     
  Misses       1945     1945              
- Partials      178      179       +1     

Flag	Coverage Δ
backend	99.56% <100.00%> (?)

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

Files with missing lines	Coverage Δ
src/services/contributor-evidence-graph.ts	99.56% <100.00%> (ø)

[loopover-orb]

Tip

✅ LoopOver review result - approve/merge recommended

_{Review updated: 2026-07-26 14:19:07 UTC}

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

✅ Suggested Action - Approve/Merge

• safe to merge

Review summary
This is a small, correctly-scoped fix that adds an outcomes-cap warning to buildContributorEvidenceGraph, mirroring the existing repos/labels/paths warning pattern at contributor-evidence-graph.ts:275. The fix correctly traces to the source: buildOutcomeEdges (contributor-evidence-graph.ts:314-353) does not dedupe or cap outcomes per repo before the caller slices them at line 244, so the outcomes array genuinely can exceed CONTRIBUTOR_EVIDENCE_GRAPH_MAX_OUTCOMES even when repos stay under MAX_REPOS, making the new warning branch reachable. The accompanying test constructs a history with duplicate-repo outcome rows exceeding the cap and asserts both the truncation and the warning message, which is a real (not fabricated) exercise of the new branch.

Nits — 2 non-blocking

• The PR closes fix(services): contributor-evidence-graph.ts caps outcomes silently with no warning, unlike the other three capped collections #8887 but doesn't touch the `outcomes` field type constraints or add a corresponding bound check elsewhere (e.g. in `buildOutcomeEdges` itself) — consider whether future call sites bypassing the top-level `outcomes.length < allOutcomes.length` comparison could miss this warning.
• None beyond what's already covered — the change is minimal and well-tested for its scope.

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	#8887
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: 162 registered-repo PR(s), 74 merged, 5 issue(s).
Contributor context	✅ Confirmed Gittensor contributor	joaovictor91123; Gittensor profile; 162 PR(s), 5 issue(s).
Improvement	✅ Minor	risk: clean · value: minor · LLM: minor

Linked issue satisfaction

Addressed
The diff adds the exact outcomes-cap warning branch matching the repos/labels/paths pattern as requested, and adds a dedicated unit test that forces more than the max outcomes and asserts the new warning string appears in warnings.

Review context

• Author: joaovictor91123
• Role context: outside_contributor
• Public audience mode: oss maintainer
• Lane context: Repository is configured for direct PR review.
• Public profile languages: Python, JavaScript, MDX, TypeScript, C++, CSS, Rust
• Official Gittensor activity: 162 PR(s), 5 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.

_{🟩 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.