feat(mcp): add remote + stdio surfaces for loopover_get_live_gate_thresholds

[RealDiligent]

Summary

• Closes loopover_get_live_gate_thresholds has a REST route but no remote MCP tool or local stdio MCP tool #7801: register loopover_get_live_gate_thresholds on the remote MCP server and local stdio bin (mirror reviewability auth + REST toLiveGateThresholdFields / authoritativeGateOverride), with found / live_gate_thresholds_not_found / forbidden coverage.
• In-process bin coverage via exported server + InMemoryTransport (same pattern as merged feat(mcp): add remote + stdio surfaces for loopover_get_registry_snapshot #7917 / feat(mcp): add remote + stdio surfaces for loopover_get_upstream_ruleset #7921).

Test plan

• vitest mcp-cli-live-gate-thresholds + mcp-output-schemas + mcp-tool-rename-aliases
• CI validate / validate-tests green
• codecov/patch not 0% on bin-only lines

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 82.48%. Comparing base (a97dd18) to head (1b4bbbf).

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #7924      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   91.77%   82.48%   -9.29%     
==========================================
  Files         731       90     -641     
  Lines       74887    24409   -50478     
  Branches    22847     4695   -18152     
==========================================
- Hits        68726    20134   -48592     
+ Misses       5083     4039    -1044     
+ Partials     1078      236     -842     

Flag	Coverage Δ
shard-1	22.75% <20.00%> (-37.48%)	⬇️
shard-2	21.87% <33.33%> (-24.28%)	⬇️
shard-3	32.64% <86.66%> (-21.06%)	⬇️

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

Files with missing lines	Coverage Δ
packages/loopover-mcp/bin/loopover-mcp.ts	13.71% <100.00%> (+0.11%)	⬆️
src/mcp/server.ts	96.57% <100.00%> (+0.04%)	⬆️

... and 641 files with indirect coverage changes

[loopover-orb]

Tip

✅ LoopOver review result - approve/merge recommended

_{Review updated: 2026-07-21 18:24:38 UTC}

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

✅ Suggested Action - Approve/Merge

• safe to merge

Review summary
This PR mirrors the existing #7917/#7921 pattern to register loopover_get_live_gate_thresholds on both the remote MCP server and stdio bin, wiring through the existing authoritativeGateOverride/toLiveGateThresholdFields helpers from src/review/auto-apply with allowlist auth via canAccessRepo. It's well-tested (found/not-found/forbidden cases via InMemoryTransport, output schema shape, tool count bump to 85, fixture harness route) and the diff is coherent with its stated intent and linked issue #7801.

Nits — 5 non-blocking

• The `apiUrl`/`LOOPOVER_API_TOKEN`/harness value flagged by the external brief at test/unit/mcp-cli-live-gate-thresholds.test.ts:32 is a test fixture credential, not a real secret, but consider naming it more obviously as a dummy value to avoid future false-positive secret scans.
• packages/loopover-mcp/bin/loopover-mcp.ts:1569 uses `async ({ owner, repo }: any)` — the surrounding stdio tools appear to follow this same untyped-callback convention, but it'd be nice to type it against the ownerRepoShape-derived input.
• src/mcp/server.ts:3416 getLiveGateThresholds casts `this.env as unknown as StorageEnv` — verify this matches the exact same cast pattern used by loadOverride/loadShadowOverride call sites for the sibling REST route to keep them in sync.
• packages/loopover-mcp/bin/loopover-mcp.ts:1560 — the `any` on the callback param could be replaced with the inferred type from `ownerRepoShape` for consistency with stricter tools elsewhere in the file, if that pattern exists.
• Possible secret-shaped assignment in the diff (generic_secret_assignment) — Verify the value is not a real credential.

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	#7801
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: 393 registered-repo PR(s), 176 merged, 36 issue(s).
Contributor context	✅ Confirmed Gittensor contributor	RealDiligent; Gittensor profile; 393 PR(s), 36 issue(s).
Improvement	✅ Minor	risk: clean · value: minor · LLM: minor

Linked issue satisfaction

Addressed
The diff registers loopover_get_live_gate_thresholds as a remote MCP tool (ownerRepoShape input, maintainer category) using authoritativeGateOverride/toLiveGateThresholdFields exactly as the REST route does, and as a local stdio tool calling GET .../live-gate-thresholds via apiGet, with the not-found case returned as a normal result rather than a throw, matching the requested pattern.

Review context

• Author: RealDiligent
• 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: 393 PR(s), 36 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 approves — the gate is satisfied and CI is green.