fix(queue): skip generate-tests on closed PRs with pr_not_open

[joaovictor91123]

Summary

• Add pr.state !== "open" guards to maybeProcessGenerateTestsCommand and maybeProcessPrPanelGenerateTests, mirroring maybeProcessPrPanelRetrigger's orb(review): panel re-run checkbox on a closed/merged PR does real work, then silently no-ops #9020 fix.
• Record pr_not_open via recordGenerateTestsSkip before authorization or AI generation.

Closes #9311

Scope

• Focused queue-only change with Closes #9311.

Validation

• Closed-PR skip tests for command + checkbox in test/unit/queue-5.test.ts.
• Full CI (local Node v24; repo pins Node 22).

Safety

• No secrets or UI changes.

UI Evidence

N/A.

Notes

• Replaces closed fix(queue): skip generate-tests on closed PRs with pr_not_open #9333 (prior CI failed on unrelated selfhost-pg-retention.test.ts flakes; queue-5.test.ts and validate-code passed).
• fix(bounties): type-guard normalizeGittBountySnapshot's untrusted Gitt payload fields #9335 (kai392) shows green CI on current main — rebased on f7dda798.

[superagent-security]

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

[codecov]

❌ 2 Tests Failed:

Tests completed	Failed	Passed	Skipped
3933	2	3931	11

View the top 2 failed test(s) by shortest run time

test/unit/selfhost-pg-retention.test.ts > runRetentionPrune + processJob on the Postgres backend (#977) > processJob prune-retention deletes eligible rows and records a success audit event on Postgres

Stack Traces | 0.00737s run time

AssertionError: expected 3 to be +0 // Object.is equality

- Expected
+ Received

- 0
+ 3

 ❯ test/unit/selfhost-pg-retention.test.ts:119:44

test/unit/selfhost-pg-retention.test.ts > pruneExpiredRecords on the Postgres backend (#977) > deletes across multiple bounded batches and stops at the per-table cap, same as the SQLite path

Stack Traces | 0.0122s run time

AssertionError: expected +0 to be 4 // Object.is equality

- Expected
+ Received

- 4
+ 0

 ❯ test/unit/selfhost-pg-retention.test.ts:76:33

To view more test analytics, go to the Test Analytics Dashboard
_{📋 Got 3 mins? Take this short survey to help us improve Test Analytics.}

[loopover-orb]

Caution

🛑 LoopOver review result - fixes required

_{Review updated: 2026-07-27 13:34:53 UTC}

2 files · 1 AI reviewer · no blockers · CI failing · unstable

🛑 Suggested Action - Fix Blockers

Review summary
This PR adds a `pr.state !== "open"` guard to `maybeProcessGenerateTestsCommand` and `maybeProcessPrPanelGenerateTests`, mirroring the existing `pr_not_open` pattern already used by `maybeProcessPrPanelRetrigger` (#9020). The guard is placed before authorization/AI-generation work and records the skip via `recordGenerateTestsSkip`, closing #9311. Both call sites are covered by new tests in `queue-5.test.ts` that assert the model is never invoked and no comment is posted, which is the correct way to prove this path is actually exercised.

Nits — 3 non-blocking

• nit: `src/queue/processors.ts` — confirm the guard's placement relative to the `cached_pr_missing` check in both functions is consistent (it appears to be, immediately after, per the diff) so ordering doesn't diverge between the two call sites over time.
• The two new tests in `test/unit/queue-5.test.ts` are near-duplicates (command vs. checkbox variant) with the same title string — consider a shared helper to reduce duplication, though this is purely stylistic.
• Consider extracting the `pr.state !== "open"` + `recordGenerateTestsSkip(..., "pr_not_open")` pair into a small shared helper since it's now duplicated in three call sites total (including the orb(review): panel re-run checkbox on a closed/merged PR does real work, then silently no-ops #9020 `maybeProcessPrPanelRetrigger` precedent), to avoid future drift if the skip reason or ordering ever needs to change.

CI checks failing

• validate
• validate-tests

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	#9311, #9333
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 (2 linked issues).
Validation posture	✅ 25/25	PR body includes validation/test evidence.
Contributor workload	✅ 10/10	Author activity: 130 registered-repo PR(s), 57 merged, 4 issue(s).
Contributor context	✅ Confirmed Gittensor contributor	joaovictor91123; Gittensor profile; 130 PR(s), 4 issue(s).
Improvement	✅ Minor	risk: clean · value: minor · LLM: moderate

Linked issue satisfaction

Addressed
The diff adds a pr.state !== "open" guard with a "pr_not_open" skip via recordGenerateTestsSkip to both maybeProcessGenerateTestsCommand and maybeProcessPrPanelGenerateTests, positioned right after the cached-PR-missing check and before authorization, matching the retrigger precedent, and adds closed-PR test cases in queue-5.test.ts for both the checkbox and text-command handlers asserting the AI

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: 130 PR(s), 4 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 is closing this pull request on the maintainer's behalf (CI is failing (validate, validate-tests)). This is an automated maintenance action — to pursue this change, please open a new pull request with the issues resolved. Closed PRs may be analyzed later to improve review accuracy, but they are not automatically reopened or re-reviewed.