chore(release): cut ui-kit v1.3.1

[JSONbored]

🤖 I have created a release beep boop

1.3.1 (2026-07-31)

Dependencies

• ui-kit: publish the stranded recharts v3 migration, and guard the class (#9977) (c6fcee9)

---

This PR was generated with Release Please. See documentation.

[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	a1b10ac	Commit Preview URL Branch Preview URL	Jul 31 2026, 01:15 AM

[loopover-orb]

Warning

⏸️ LoopOver review result - manual review recommended

_{Review updated: 2026-07-31 02:51:04 UTC}

4 files · 1 AI reviewer · 1 blocker · CI green · clean

⏸️ Suggested Action - Manual Review

Review summary
Standard automated release-please version bump for @​loopover/ui-kit from 1.3.1, syncing package.json, manifest, changelog, and lockfile after the recharts v3 migration (#9977) was merged. All four files are consistent version bumps with no logic changes, and CI passed on all checks.

Nits — 1 non-blocking

• The changelog entry references a squash-merge commit hash that should match what's actually on the ui-kit-v1.3.1 tag once this release PR merges — standard release-please behavior, nothing to act on.

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.

📋 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.

Decision drivers

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

Context & advisory signals — never blocks the verdict

Signal	Result	Evidence
Linked issue	✅ No-issue rationale	PR body explains why no issue is linked.
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	⚠️ 20/25	Preflight is ready, but the PR body does not name the validation run.
Contributor workload	✅ 10/10	Author activity: 9 registered-repo PR(s), 8 merged, 274 issue(s).
Contributor context	✅ Confirmed Gittensor contributor	JSONbored; Gittensor profile; 9 PR(s), 274 issue(s).
Improvement	ℹ️ Insufficient signal	risk: clean · value: insufficient-signal

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), 274 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 1 step 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: a7669b13d471c8b5449452add4b87ffbe157f79f130c382379fe95fc875044e3 · pack: oss-anti-slop · ci: passed
• record: a7a5b6049d63b5853713db18a96d5f589a4f52b79b3d51d788799c79163bd2bd (schema v6, head a1b10ac)

_{🟩 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]

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

[codecov]

Bundle Report

Bundle size has no change ✅

[codecov]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 91.88%. Comparing base (910fa59) to head (a1b10ac).
✅ All tests successful. No failed tests found.

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main    #9982   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   91.88%   91.88%           
=======================================
  Files         928      928           
  Lines      113722   113722           
  Branches    27436    27436           
=======================================
  Hits       104489   104489           
  Misses       7936     7936           
  Partials     1297     1297           

Flag	Coverage Δ
backend	95.67% <ø> (ø)
engine	72.35% <ø> (ø)

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