feat(review): add a performance-regression instruction to the AI review system prompt

[JSONbored]

Summary

• REVIEW_SYSTEM_PROMPT (src/services/ai-review.ts) exhaustively defined blocker criteria — bug/security-hole/data-loss/build-break/API-contract-break — but never mentioned algorithmic complexity, N+1 queries, or unbounded loop/fanout. REES's ~19 analyzers don't target the PR's own new code's runtime performance either (the closed feat(rees): add performance guardrails and regression telemetry #1814 is about REES's OWN service budgets, a different thing). A genuinely bad performance regression (a DB query moved inside a loop) was structurally invisible to the reviewer.
• Adds a performance-regression category to the blockers taxonomy bullet, and a new PERFORMANCE SEVERITY discipline line matching the existing "don't nitpick, flag what matters" tone — a concrete, visible regression (query/network call moved inside a loop, an unbounded loop/fanout) is a blocker; a style/micro-optimization preference stays a nit.
• Pure prompt-engineering change: no new service, no new cost, no new analyzer.

Closes #2559.

Scope

• The PR title follows type(scope): short summary Conventional Commit format.
• 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 an issue, or this is small enough that the summary explains why an issue is not needed.

Validation

• git diff --check
• npm run actionlint (via npm run test:ci)
• npm run typecheck
• npm run test:coverage locally — a test asserts the real system prompt sent to the model includes the new blocker category, the PERFORMANCE SEVERITY line, and the severity-discipline phrasing; mutation-tested (reverted the addition, confirmed the test fails).
• npm run test:workers (via npm run test:ci)
• npm run build:mcp (via npm run test:ci)
• npm run test:mcp-pack (via npm run test:ci)
• npm run ui:openapi:check (via npm run test:ci) — no OpenAPI-visible change
• npm run ui:lint (via npm run test:ci)
• npm run ui:typecheck (via npm run test:ci)
• npm run ui:build (via npm run test:ci)
• npm audit --audit-level=moderate
• New or changed behavior has unit/integration tests for new branches, fallback paths, and sanitizer boundaries

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. — N/A, no auth/session/CORS surface touched.
• API/OpenAPI/MCP behavior is updated and tested where needed. — N/A, no API-visible change (internal prompt text only).
• UI changes use live API data or real empty/error/loading states, not production mock/demo fallbacks. — N/A, no UI change.
• Visible UI changes include a UI Evidence section below with screenshots. — N/A, no UI change.
• Public docs/changelogs are updated where needed; changelogs are only edited for release-prep PRs. — N/A.

Notes

• Second of a batch of independent maintainer-only roadmap items being worked one PR at a time (see feat(review): surface the test-evidence classifier in the AI review prompt #2635 for the first, feat(review): surface the deterministic test-evidence classifier in the AI review prompt #2558).

[loopover-orb]

Warning

🟨🟨🟨🟨🟨🟨🟨🟨🟨🟨🟨🟨

⏸️ Gittensory review result - manual review recommended

_{Review updated: 2026-07-02 22:25:26 UTC}

2 files · 1 AI reviewer · no blockers · readiness 80/100 · CI green · clean

⏸️ Suggested Action - Manual Review

• Touches a guarded path — held for manual review

Review summary
The change cleanly extends the AI-review system prompt so visible algorithmic or fanout regressions can be classified as blockers while preserving the existing severity boundary for micro-optimizations. The unit test exercises the real review path, captures the emitted system prompt, and verifies the new category and severity guidance are actually sent to the model. I do not see a correctness, wiring, or contract break in this focused prompt-engineering diff.

Nits — 4 non-blocking

• nit: test/unit/ai-review.test.ts:1788 repeats a full AI-review invocation just to inspect the system prompt; a shared helper for extracting the system message would make future prompt assertions less noisy.
• test/unit/ai-review.test.ts:1788: consider extracting the run/mock/env setup into a small local helper alongside the other prompt-instruction tests so additions to REVIEW_SYSTEM_PROMPT stay easy to review.
• PR author also opened the linked issue — Link an issue that was opened by a different contributor, or provide a rationale for why this self-authored issue represents genuine discovery work.
• Touches a guarded path — held for manual review — A maintainer must review and merge this change.

Signal	Result	Evidence
Code review	✅ No blockers	1 reviewer
Linked issue	✅ Linked	#1814, #2559
Related work	⚠️ 2 scoped overlaps	Top overlaps are listed below; lower-confidence bulk is hidden.
Change scope	❌ 8/20	High review scope from cached public metadata (size label size:XS; 2 linked issues).
Validation posture	✅ 25/25	PR body includes validation/test evidence.
Contributor workload	✅ 10/10	Author activity: 64 registered-repo PR(s), 55 merged, 522 issue(s).
Contributor context	✅ Confirmed Gittensor contributor	JSONbored; Gittensor profile; 64 PR(s), 522 issue(s).
Gate result	⚠️ Not blocking	Advisory; not blocking this PR.

Review context

• Author: JSONbored
• Role context: owner (maintainer lane)
• Public audience mode: oss maintainer
• Lane context: Repository registration is not available in the local Gittensory cache.
• Public profile languages: not available
• Official Gittensor activity: 64 PR(s), 522 issue(s).
• Related work: Items reference the same linked issue feat(enrichment): blame-to-PR regression linker analyzer #2034. (issue #2034, PR #2620)
• Related work: Open PR work references issue feat(enrichment): blame-to-PR regression linker analyzer #2034. (issue #2034, PR #2620)

Contributor next steps

• Treat this as maintainer-lane context rather than normal contributor-lane activity.
• Review top overlaps.
• Add a concise scope and risk note.
• No action.
• Check active issues and PRs before submitting.

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.

_{🟩 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 Gittensory, a quiet PR intelligence layer for OSS maintainers.

• Re-run Gittensory review

[codecov]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 96.05%. Comparing base (bcc19ea) to head (6cc9a99).
⚠️ Report is 2 commits behind head on main.
✅ All tests successful. No failed tests found.

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main    #2636   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   96.05%   96.05%           
=======================================
  Files         234      234           
  Lines       26280    26280           
  Branches     9531     9531           
=======================================
  Hits        25244    25244           
  Misses        425      425           
  Partials      611      611           

Files with missing lines	Coverage Δ
src/services/ai-review.ts	95.17% <ø> (ø)

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• 📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.