docs(scripts): fix stale --db gittensory example in export-d1-data.mjs

[philluiz2323]

Summary

• scripts/export-d1-data.mjs's usage comment told a maintainer to run node scripts/export-d1-data.mjs --db gittensory --output ./export [...]. The real D1 database name (per wrangler.jsonc's "database_name": "loopover") was renamed from gittensory to loopover during the 2026-07-15 repo rename. Copy-pasting the example as written would target a database name that no longer exists.
• Updated the usage comment to --db loopover.
• Grepped the rest of the file for other stale gittensory-named examples — this was the only one.

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 a currently open issue this PR resolves.

Closes #7012

Validation

• git diff --check
• npm run actionlint (no workflow changes in this PR)
• npm run typecheck (no type-level surface in a comment-only change; ran anyway, no errors)
• npm run test:coverage (not applicable; scripts/** is outside the Codecov patch gate per codecov.yml's ignore: scripts/**, and per the issue this is a doc-comment-only change with no behavioral diff)
• npm run test:workers (not applicable to this change)
• npm run build:mcp (not applicable to this change)
• npm run test:mcp-pack (not applicable to this change)
• npm run ui:openapi:check (not applicable to this change)
• npm run ui:lint (not applicable to this change)
• npm run ui:typecheck (not applicable to this change)
• npm run ui:build (not applicable to this change)
• npm audit --audit-level=moderate (no dependency changes in this PR)
• New or changed behavior has unit/integration tests for new branches, fallback paths, and sanitizer boundaries

If any required check was skipped, explain why:

• This is a single-line usage-comment correction in scripts/export-d1-data.mjs, explicitly called out in the linked issue as "no behavioral diff, no new test required." npm run typecheck and npm run docs:drift-check both pass locally; the existing test/unit/check-branding-drift-script.test.ts (which scans the repo for stale branding references) also passes with this change applied.

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/cookie/CORS/session changes in this PR.)
• API/OpenAPI/MCP behavior is updated and tested where needed. (N/A -- no API/OpenAPI/MCP changes in this PR.)
• UI changes use live API data or real empty/error/loading states, not production mock/demo fallbacks. (N/A -- no UI changes in this PR.)
• Visible UI changes include a UI Evidence section below with JPG/JPEG or PNG screenshots. (N/A -- this PR has no UI/visual surface; it corrects a code comment in a maintenance script.)
• Public docs/changelogs are updated where needed; changelogs are only edited for release-prep PRs.

Notes

[superagent-security]

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

[loopover-orb]

Caution

🛑 LoopOver review result - fixes required

_{Review updated: 2026-07-17 20:23:55 UTC}

1 file · 1 AI reviewer · no blockers · CI failing · blocked

🛑 Suggested Action - Fix Blockers

Review summary
This is a one-line comment-only fix updating a stale `--db gittensory` example to `--db loopover` in the usage comment header of scripts/export-d1-data.mjs, matching the actual D1 database_name in wrangler.jsonc. The change is correct, minimal, and well-scoped to the linked issue #7012, with no behavioral impact since it only touches a comment.

Nits — 3 non-blocking

• scripts/** is excluded from the coverage gate per codecov.yml, so the lack of test-path changes here is expected and not a concern for a comment-only fix.
• No further action needed; the fix is complete and matches the grep-verified scope described in the PR body.
• Code changes lack test evidence — Add focused regression tests or explain why existing coverage is sufficient.

CI checks failing

• validate
• validate-tests (1)

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	#7012
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 (1 linked issue).
Validation posture	✅ 25/25	PR body includes validation/test evidence.
Contributor workload	✅ 10/10	Author activity: 1092 registered-repo PR(s), 659 merged, 135 issue(s).
Contributor context	✅ Confirmed Gittensor contributor	philluiz2323; Gittensor profile; 1092 PR(s), 135 issue(s).
Improvement	ℹ️ None detected	risk: low · value: none · LLM: minor

Linked issue satisfaction

Addressed
The diff updates the exact stale usage comment at line 7 from '--db gittensory' to '--db loopover', matching the issue's requirement, and the PR states the rest of the file was grepped with no other stale references found.

Review context

• Author: philluiz2323
• Role context: outside_contributor
• Public audience mode: oss maintainer
• Lane context: Repository is configured for direct PR review.
• Public profile languages: not available
• Official Gittensor activity: 1092 PR(s), 135 issue(s).
• PR-specific overlap: none found.

Contributor next steps

• Keep the PR focused and include validation evidence before maintainer review.

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 (1))). 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.