feat(agent-actions): add an account-age throttle for ban-evasion

[JSONbored]

Summary

• The contributor blacklist matches by exact login string; the contributor cap counts open items per repo. Neither has any signal for how OLD a GitHub account is — the classic ban-evasion gap: a banned login gets a fresh account the same day and gets full trust until it independently trips the cap on its own in ONE repo.
• Adds accountAgeThresholdDays: a PR from an account younger than the threshold gets the new-account label AND a tightened effective contributorOpenPrCap (half, rounded up, minimum 1) — friction/visibility only, never an automatic close on account age alone. PR-path only for now (the issue-path cap enforcement doesn't read this setting yet).
• Fetches created_at via GET /users/{login} — already classified as a cached "metadata" GitHub response (src/github/client.ts's resolveGitHubCacheClass), so this reuses the existing response-cache infra with zero new caching mechanism.
• Off by default (null threshold). Never fires for the repo owner, admin logins, automation bots, or a repo-scoped autoCloseExemptLogins entry — same standing exemption as every other anti-abuse mechanism (blacklist, contributor cap, review-nag). The label mutation itself is additionally gated behind label autonomy being "auto", matching every other label write.
• Full config-as-code chain wired (migration + Drizzle schema + RepositorySettings type + db/repositories.ts resolver + .gittensory.yml parsing + OpenAPI schema + .gittensory.yml.example docs).

Closes #2561.

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 db:migrations:check — migration 0096 (rebased/renumbered after a main-side collision), contiguous, no new duplicates
• npm run typecheck
• npm run test:coverage locally — tests covering: a below-threshold account gets the label AND the tightened cap trips a close a raw-cap check wouldn't; an above-threshold account is fully unaffected; the repo owner's own PR is never labeled even on a brand-new account; getGithubUserCreatedAt fetches/parses/fails-open on error; .gittensory.yml parsing (set/override/clear-via-null/omitted/invalid).
• 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 — regenerated and committed apps/gittensory-ui/public/openapi.json
• 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. — RepositorySettings's new fields added to the OpenAPI schema and regenerated.
• 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. — .gittensory.yml.example documents the new settings.

Notes

• Fourth of a batch of independent maintainer-only roadmap items being worked one PR at a time.

[loopover-orb]

Warning

🟨🟨🟨🟨🟨🟨🟨🟨🟨🟨🟨🟨

⏸️ Gittensory review result - manual review recommended

_{Review updated: 2026-07-02 23:42:54 UTC}

13 files · 1 AI reviewer · 1 blocker · readiness 100/100 · CI pending · blocked

⏸️ Suggested Action - Manual Review

• Possible leaked secret in the diff (generic_secret_assignment) — Remove the secret from the diff, rotate the exposed credential, then re-run the gate.

Review summary
The change wires a default-off account-age setting through schema, migration, repository settings, config-as-code, OpenAPI, and the PR maintenance path. The PR path is coherent: it fails open on lookup errors, respects label autonomy for the visibility label, and only tightens an already-configured contributor cap rather than closing solely on account age. The main remaining concerns are policy/documentation alignment around exemptions and the explicitly PR-only scope.

Nits — 6 non-blocking

• nit: src/queue/processors.ts:1986 does not consult autoCloseExemptLogins before applying the new-account label, so confirm whether the shared anti-abuse exemption list is intentionally ignored for this visibility throttle.
• nit: src/github/app.ts:425 returns any string created_at value; explicitly rejecting unparseable date strings would keep the fail-open behavior local to the GitHub helper instead of relying on Date.parse(...)=NaN in the processor.
• nit: src/types.ts:672 documents the feature as PR-path only while the PR description says PR/issue, so align the public contract or add the issue-path wiring in a follow-up.
• nit: test/unit/queue.test.ts:6707 covers the owner exemption but not the admin or automation-bot exemptions that the processor condition also promises.
• In src/queue/processors.ts:1986, either add the same repo-scoped exemption check used by the anti-abuse planner or document why account-age labeling is deliberately outside autoCloseExemptLogins.
• 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.

Concerns raised — review before merging

• Possible leaked secret in the diff (generic_secret_assignment) — Remove the secret from the diff, rotate the exposed credential, then re-run the gate.

Signal	Result	Evidence
Code review	❌ 1 blocker	1 reviewer
Linked issue	✅ Linked	#2561
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 (size label size:L; 1 linked issue).
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	❌ Blocking	Repo-configured hard blocker found.

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).
• PR-specific overlap: none found.

Contributor next steps

• Treat this as maintainer-lane context rather than normal contributor-lane activity.
• No action.

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

❌ Patch coverage is 92.59259% with 2 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 96.09%. Comparing base (3bee887) to head (315f547).
⚠️ Report is 5 commits behind head on main.
✅ All tests successful. No failed tests found.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
src/queue/processors.ts	83.33%	0 Missing and 2 partials ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #2642      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   96.09%   96.09%   -0.01%     
==========================================
  Files         237      237              
  Lines       26448    26474      +26     
  Branches     9589     9602      +13     
==========================================
+ Hits        25416    25440      +24     
  Misses        425      425              
- Partials      607      609       +2     

Files with missing lines	Coverage Δ
src/db/repositories.ts	96.58% <100.00%> (+<0.01%)	⬆️
src/db/schema.ts	69.46% <ø> (ø)
src/github/app.ts	98.16% <100.00%> (+0.06%)	⬆️
src/openapi/schemas.ts	100.00% <ø> (ø)
src/signals/focus-manifest.ts	99.27% <100.00%> (+<0.01%)	⬆️
src/queue/processors.ts	92.39% <83.33%> (-0.06%)	⬇️

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

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

[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	gittensory-ui	315f547	Commit Preview URL Branch Preview URL	Jul 02 2026, 11:44 PM