fix(scripts): document AI review-pipeline self-host env vars

[jaytbarimbao-collab]

Closes #6993

gen-selfhost-env-reference.mjs's DEFAULT_SOURCE_ROOTS never scanned the AI review pipeline (src/services/ai-review.ts, src/queue/ai-review-orchestration.ts, src/queue/processors.ts), so the self-host AI_* knobs read there — AI_SUMMARIES_ENABLED, AI_PUBLIC_COMMENTS_ENABLED, AI_MAX_OUTPUT_TOKENS, AI_BYOK_DAILY_REPO_LIMIT — were missing from the generated reference despite being real self-host config.

Change

• Add the three AI review-pipeline files to DEFAULT_SOURCE_ROOTS.
• Regenerate apps/loopover-ui/src/lib/selfhost-env-reference.ts (npm run selfhost:env-reference). The four named vars now appear, along with the sibling self-host vars those files read (previously undocumented for the same scan-gap reason) — the generator documents what the scanned files actually read.

Tests

• Added a regression test asserting collectSelfHostEnvVars picks up all four vars from the real repo, with AI_MAX_OUTPUT_TOKENS's first reference pinned to src/services/ai-review.ts (proving the new root is the source).

Validation

• npx vitest run test/unit/selfhost-env-reference-script.test.ts — 6 passed.
• npm run selfhost:env-reference:check — committed reference in sync.
• 100% patch coverage on the changed scripts/** lines (apps/** generated file is outside Codecov coverage.include).

[superagent-security]

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

[codecov]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 93.75%. Comparing base (a624234) to head (fb7ddbb).
⚠️ Report is 2 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main    #7141   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   93.75%   93.75%           
=======================================
  Files         692      692           
  Lines       68853    68853           
  Branches    18781    18781           
=======================================
  Hits        64556    64556           
  Misses       3302     3302           
  Partials      995      995           

Flag	Coverage Δ
shard-1	43.76% <ø> (ø)
shard-2	36.92% <ø> (ø)
shard-3	33.13% <ø> (ø)
shard-4	34.46% <ø> (ø)
shard-5	32.29% <ø> (-0.01%)	⬇️
shard-6	45.91% <ø> (ø)

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

[loopover-orb]

Caution

🛑 LoopOver review result - fixes required

_{Review updated: 2026-07-18 00:31:24 UTC}

3 files · 1 AI reviewer · no blockers · CI failing · blocked

🛑 Suggested Action - Fix Blockers

Review summary
This PR closes #6993 by adding three AI review-pipeline source files to `DEFAULT_SOURCE_ROOTS` in the env-reference generator and regenerating the derived `selfhost-env-reference.ts` file, which now surfaces the four named AI_* knobs plus their sibling vars from the same files. The change is narrow, mechanical, and matches its stated intent; the regression test confirms all four target vars are collected and pins `AI_MAX_OUTPUT_TOKENS`'s source to `src/services/ai-review.ts`, proving the new root is what surfaces it. CI failures on `validate` and `validate-code` are worth checking but aren't visible defects in this diff.

Nits — 4 non-blocking

• The generated file flagged as `long-file` (612 lines) is auto-generated output from the script, not hand-maintained code, so the size threshold isn't a meaningful maintainability signal here — worth excluding generated files from that check if not already done.
• The regression test in `test/unit/selfhost-env-reference-script.test.ts` calls `collectSelfHostEnvVars({})` against the real repo rather than a fixture, which is appropriate for this proof but makes the test fragile to unrelated future additions of new source roots or removed AI_* vars — a comment noting that tradeoff would help future maintainers.
• Consider verifying the CI failures on `validate` and `validate-code` aren't related to the new source roots (e.g. lint/type issues in the newly-scanned files being pulled into some check) before merging.
• The PR could briefly note why `AI_DAILY_NEURON_BUDGET`, `AI_GATEWAY_ID`, `AI_REVIEW_PLAN`, `GITHUB_PUBLIC_TOKEN`, etc. (undocumented siblings) are also now included — the description mentions this in passing but it's easy for a reviewer to conflate with scope creep; a one-line clarification avoids that confusion.

CI checks failing

• validate
• validate-code

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	#6993
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: 191 registered-repo PR(s), 99 merged, 14 issue(s).
Contributor context	✅ Confirmed Gittensor contributor	jaytbarimbao-collab; Gittensor profile; 191 PR(s), 14 issue(s).
Improvement	✅ Minor	risk: clean · value: minor · LLM: moderate

Linked issue satisfaction

Addressed
The PR adds the three AI review-pipeline files to DEFAULT_SOURCE_ROOTS, regenerates selfhost-env-reference.ts which now includes all four named vars (AI_SUMMARIES_ENABLED, AI_PUBLIC_COMMENTS_ENABLED, AI_MAX_OUTPUT_TOKENS, AI_BYOK_DAILY_REPO_LIMIT), and adds a regression test asserting the generator picks these up with AI_MAX_OUTPUT_TOKENS pinned to ai-review.ts.

Review context

• Author: jaytbarimbao-collab
• Role context: outside_contributor
• Public audience mode: oss maintainer
• Lane context: Repository is configured for direct PR review.
• Public profile languages: Rust
• Official Gittensor activity: 191 PR(s), 14 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-code)). 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.