fix(config-lint): recognize fairnessAnalytics as a top-level field

[marktech0813]

Summary

`fairnessAnalytics` is parsed by `focus-manifest.ts` but was missing from `TOP_LEVEL_FIELDS` in `config-lint.ts`, producing a false "unknown top-level field" warning.

Closes #8365

Test plan

• Regression in `selfhost-config-lint.test.ts`

Made with Cursor

[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 92.41%. Comparing base (af270b9) to head (a524db8).
⚠️ Report is 3 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #8406      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   92.42%   92.41%   -0.01%     
==========================================
  Files         791      791              
  Lines       79250    79250              
  Branches    23946    23946              
==========================================
- Hits        73243    73239       -4     
  Misses       4868     4868              
- Partials     1139     1143       +4     

Flag	Coverage Δ
shard-1	56.36% <ø> (ø)
shard-2	53.07% <ø> (ø)
shard-3	53.01% <ø> (-0.04%)	⬇️

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

Files with missing lines	Coverage Δ
packages/loopover-engine/src/config-lint.ts	100.00% <ø> (ø)

... and 1 file with indirect coverage changes

[loopover-orb]

Tip

✅ LoopOver review result - approve/merge recommended

_{Review updated: 2026-07-24 12:11:20 UTC}

2 files · 1 AI reviewer · no blockers · readiness 93/100 · CI green · clean

✅ Suggested Action - Approve/Merge

• safe to merge

Review summary
This is a one-line addition of "fairnessAnalytics" to the TOP_LEVEL_FIELDS allowlist in config-lint.ts, mirroring the exact same pattern used for prior fields (federatedIntelligence, experimental, repoDocGeneration) that were parsed by focus-manifest.ts but missing from this linter's allowlist. The accompanying regression test follows the established convention exactly and correctly asserts ok:true, no warnings, and the field appearing in recognizedFields. The fix directly closes the referenced issue (#8365) and is consistent with the file's own history of incremental field additions.

Nits — 2 non-blocking

• The PR doesn't independently verify that focus-manifest.ts actually parses `fairnessAnalytics` — worth double-checking that source-of-truth file, though the described symptom (false unknown-field warning) is consistent with the fix.
• Consider adding fairnessAnalytics to any example/reference YAML config docs if such a file lists all top-level fields, so the allowlist and docs stay in sync (not visible in this diff).

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	#8365
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: 98 registered-repo PR(s), 15 merged, 0 issue(s).
Contributor context	✅ Confirmed Gittensor contributor	marktech0813; Gittensor profile; 98 PR(s), 0 issue(s).
Improvement	✅ Minor	risk: clean · value: minor · LLM: minor

Linked issue satisfaction

Addressed
The PR adds "fairnessAnalytics" to TOP_LEVEL_FIELDS exactly as requested and includes a regression test asserting no unknown-field warning is produced for a manifest with a fairnessAnalytics block.

Review context

• Author: marktech0813
• Role context: outside_contributor
• Public audience mode: oss maintainer
• Lane context: Repository is configured for direct PR review.
• Public profile languages: Python, JavaScript, Go, CoffeeScript, Cuda, Java, QML
• Official Gittensor activity: 98 PR(s), 0 issue(s).
• PR-specific overlap: none found.

Contributor next steps

• Start here: Triage stale or unlinked PRs.

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 approves — the gate is satisfied and CI is green.