ci(guards): make every scripts/check-*.ts prove it actually runs

[JSONbored]

Refs #9860 (item 3). One item, per that issue's own "not one big PR".

What writing this found

test:ci called npm run publishable-deps:check — and no such npm script existed.

Two consequences, both live on main today:

1. npm run test:ci, the documented one-command local gate and CLAUDE.md's own non-negotiable feat(scoring): add situational score projections #3, dies with Missing script. Anyone following the contributor skill hits it.
2. scripts/check-publishable-deps.ts has never run, despite being correct and passing when invoked directly.

That is precisely #9860's thesis — a hand-maintained ~50-command chain that nobody re-derives — so the missing script is defined here and the class is now guarded.

The guard

A checker wired into nothing guards nothing while looking exactly like a guard. That is worse than not writing it, because its presence in the tree reads as coverage.

Per #9860's bar (compute the fact, don't remember it), check-checkers-wired.ts holds no list of wired checkers. It resolves where each one actually runs, from the three places a checker can legitimately live:

home	how it's detected
local gate	transitively reachable from test:ci (through aggregate scripts, and through npm lifecycle hooks)
scheduled	referenced by a workflow — by npm script name, or by the file path directly
shared module	imported by a sibling script, so not an entry point at all

Anything in none of the three fails, with the specific fix in the message. It also verifies test:ci references no npm script that does not exist — the exact hole that hid the missing one above.

ALLOWED_UNWIRED has two entries, each with a reason: check-changelog.ts (needs a release-please branch the local gate never produces) and check-roadmap-issue-drift.ts (reads live GitHub issues, so it needs a token and network). Everything else is detected, never listed.

Two false positives fixed while building it

Both would have reported correctly-wired checkers as dead, and a checker that cries wolf gets muted:

• npm lifecycle hooks — check-node-version.ts is wired as pretest/preui:test. Nothing ever says npm run pretest; npm runs it around test.
• --workspace invocations — npm run build --workspace @loopover/engine resolves against the workspace, so reading it as a root reference both misses the target and reports a phantom missing root build.

Starting point was 11 apparently-unwired checkers; after resolving real homes, 5 were genuinely suspect and exactly 1 (check-publishable-deps.ts) was truly dead.

Validation

• 15 new tests. The resolution functions are pure, so every home kind and both false-positive classes are covered directly, plus a cycle-termination case.
• Three of them run the resolution over the real tree, so this suite fails the same way CI does rather than only exercising fixtures — including one anti-vacuity assertion (the repo really does have >20 checkers and a known one really does resolve).
• checkers-wired:check, publishable-deps:check, import-specifiers:check, dead-source-files:check, turbo-inputs:check, coverage-boltons:check, docs:drift-check, typecheck all pass.

dead-exports:check fails on this branch for a pre-existing reason on main, not from this change — two unreferenced exports my merged #9938 introduced. Fixed separately in #9944, which should land first.

[loopover-orb]

Warning

⏸️ LoopOver review result - manual review recommended

_{Review updated: 2026-07-30 19:40:04 UTC}

3 files · 1 AI reviewer · 2 blockers · CI green · unknown

⏸️ Suggested Action - Manual Review

Review summary
Adds check-checkers-wired.ts, a self-computing guard that verifies every scripts/check-*.ts is actually reachable from test:ci, a workflow, or a sibling import, plus a real fix (adding the previously-undefined publishable-deps:check script that test:ci was calling). The implementation avoids the hand-maintained-list anti-pattern it's meant to prevent by resolving wiring dynamically, and is well-covered by unit tests plus a live check against the real repo tree. The console.error/console statements flagged by the external brief are expected CLI-diagnostic output for a script tool, not debug leftovers, and the magic numbers (9860, 50) are issue references/rough-count comments, not logic constants — neither is a real defect.

Nits — 5 non-blocking

• scripts/check-checkers-wired.ts: the regex-based NPM_RUN_REFERENCE matching for `npm run <name>` won't catch scripts invoked via other package managers (yarn/pnpm) or via `npm run-script`, though this repo consistently uses npm so it's low risk.
• scripts/check-checkers-wired.ts:132 resolveCheckerHome nests to depth 5; consider extracting the workflow-ref resolution into a small named helper for readability.
• The `imported` detection in resolveCheckerHome matches on substring inclusion of `./{base}"` etc., which could produce false positives if a script's file path text appears in an unrelated string/comment rather than an actual import statement.
• ALLOWED_UNWIRED reasons are good, but consider also asserting (in the real-repository test suite) that every ALLOWED_UNWIRED key still exists as a file in scripts/, so a renamed/removed checker doesn't leave a stale allowlist entry unnoticed.
• Consider parsing workflow YAML more structurely (e.g. via a YAML parser) instead of substring search on raw workflowText, to reduce false positives/negatives in workflow-ref detection.

Concerns raised — review before merging

• No linked issue detected: No closing reference or linked issue number was found in the PR metadata/body. — If this PR is intended to solve an issue, link it explicitly in the PR body.
• Maintainer requires a linked issue: This repo's maintainer focus manifest requires every PR to reference a tracked issue. — Link the relevant issue (for example Closes #123) before opening the PR.

📋 Copy for AI agents — paste into your coding agent

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

1. No linked issue detected: No closing reference or linked issue number was found in the PR metadata/body. — If this PR is intended to solve an issue, link it explicitly in the PR body.

2. Maintainer requires a linked issue: This repo's maintainer focus manifest requires every PR to reference a tracked issue. — Link the relevant issue (for example `Closes #123`) before opening the PR.

Decision drivers

• ❌ Code review — 2 blockers (1 reviewer)
• ❌ Gate result — Blocking (Repo-configured hard blocker found.)

Context & advisory signals — never blocks the verdict

Signal	Result	Evidence
Linked issue	⚠️ Missing	No linked issue or no-issue rationale found.
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 (no linked issue context).
Validation posture	✅ 25/25	PR body includes validation/test evidence.
Contributor workload	✅ 10/10	Author activity: 9 registered-repo PR(s), 8 merged, 280 issue(s).
Contributor context	✅ Confirmed Gittensor contributor	JSONbored; Gittensor profile; 9 PR(s), 280 issue(s).
Improvement	✅ Minor	risk: clean · value: minor

Review context

• Author: JSONbored
• Role context: owner (maintainer lane)
• Public audience mode: oss maintainer
• Lane context: Repository is configured for direct PR review.
• Public profile languages: Python, TypeScript, Ruby, Go, MDX, Shell, Solidity, JavaScript
• Official Gittensor activity: 9 PR(s), 280 issue(s).
• PR-specific overlap: none found.

Contributor next steps

• Start here: Treat this as maintainer-lane context rather than normal contributor-lane activity.
• Then work through the remaining 2 steps in the Signals table above.

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.

Decision record

• action: hold · clause: missing_linked_issue
• config: a80e52782f0bf2b75d47c9fd6c045da4eaf6d3c597888d337dd524075695d1e7 · pack: oss-anti-slop · ci: passed
• record: 3e8b1dcf5cf26b3faaf614e1b579e0aab8fd6e2fab9ad2bcd1f8535f095a9537 (schema v6, head c39228f)

_{🟩 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

[superagent-security]

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

[cloudflare-workers-and-pages]

Deploying with    Cloudflare Workers

The latest updates on your project. Learn more about integrating Git with Workers.

Status	Name	Latest Commit	Preview URL	Updated (UTC)
✅ Deployment successful! View logs	loopover-ui	c39228f	Commit Preview URL Branch Preview URL	Jul 30 2026, 07:16 PM

[codecov]

Bundle Report

Bundle size has no change ✅

[codecov]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 91.87%. Comparing base (bae7b2f) to head (c39228f).
⚠️ Report is 3 commits behind head on main.
✅ All tests successful. No failed tests found.

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main    #9945   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   91.87%   91.87%           
=======================================
  Files         928      928           
  Lines      113657   113657           
  Branches    27406    27406           
=======================================
  Hits       104427   104427           
  Misses       7931     7931           
  Partials     1299     1299           

Flag	Coverage Δ
backend	95.67% <ø> (ø)

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