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

[kai392]

Summary

• Closes loopover_get_repo_focus_manifest (read-only) has a REST route but no remote MCP tool or local stdio MCP tool #7808: register loopover_get_repo_focus_manifest on remote MCP + local stdio (thin mirror of GET /v1/repos/:owner/:repo/focus-manifest).
• Auth matches REST precisely: requireAppRole([maintainer,owner,operator]) + session repo access; static mcp rejected (insufficient_role). No refresh/PUT tools.
• outputSchema + authorized/forbidden coverage in mcp-output-schemas (api, mcp reject, session role reject, operator allow) + in-process stdio proxy test.
• Pins stdio tool count 87 → 88.

Scope

• Conventional Commit title
• Focused MCP-only change
• Linked open issue Closes #7808

Validation

• git diff --check
• npm run branding-drift:check
• npm run typecheck
• npm run build:mcp
• vitest --coverage mcp-output-schemas + mcp-cli-repo-focus-manifest + mcp-tool-rename-aliases (64/64)
• Local patch coverage on changed executable lines: 100% (19/19)
• Full unsharded test:coverage deferred to CI

Safety

• No secrets exposed
• Auth negative paths covered (static mcp + non-role session)
• No UI changes (UI Evidence N/A)
• No write-side refresh/PUT MCP tools

UI Evidence

N/A — MCP/API only.

Notes

• One-shot PR: will not push follow-up commits onto this branch after open.

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 82.51%. Comparing base (c6d28ab) to head (27472d5).
⚠️ Report is 1 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

@@             Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #7936       +/-   ##
===========================================
+ Coverage   65.46%   82.51%   +17.05%     
===========================================
  Files         733       90      -643     
  Lines       75133    24454    -50679     
  Branches    22918     4702    -18216     
===========================================
- Hits        49183    20179    -29004     
+ Misses      22166     4039    -18127     
+ Partials     3784      236     -3548     

Flag	Coverage Δ
shard-1	22.74% <15.78%> (?)
shard-2	22.22% <26.31%> (?)
shard-3	33.33% <89.47%> (-22.93%)	⬇️

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	14.06% <100.00%> (+2.50%)	⬆️
src/mcp/server.ts	96.69% <100.00%> (+31.72%)	⬆️

... and 643 files with indirect coverage changes

[loopover-orb]

Warning

⏸️ LoopOver review result - manual review recommended

_{Review updated: 2026-07-21 19:48:54 UTC}

7 files · 1 AI reviewer · no blockers · CI green · dirty

⏸️ Suggested Action - Manual Review

Review summary
This PR wires a thin, read-only MCP surface for the repo-owned focus manifest, mirroring the REST route's auth precisely: a new requireFocusManifestReadAccess method duplicates the existing pattern (static mcp rejected, session must have maintainer/owner/operator role, then requireRepoAccess), and both remote (src/mcp/server.ts) and stdio (loopover-mcp.ts) surfaces are registered with matching output schemas. Test coverage is solid: authorized api identity, rejected static mcp, rejected non-privileged session, allowed operator session, plus an in-process stdio proxy test and the tool-count bump from 87 to 88 is applied consistently across mcp-tool-rename-aliases and api.test.ts. The flagged 'leaked secret' at mcp-cli-repo-focus-manifest.test.ts:32 is a placeholder test token (`in-process-token`), consistent with the same pattern used by sibling test files, not a real credential.

Nits — 6 non-blocking

• The new requireFocusManifestReadAccess (src/mcp/server.ts:3160) is nearly identical to the existing requireRepoManageAccess-style helpers seen elsewhere in this file — worth a comment or shared helper if a fourth near-duplicate role-check appears next time to avoid drift between them.
• packages/loopover-mcp/bin/loopover-mcp.ts's stdio registration uses `async ({ owner, repo }: any) =>` (flagged around line 1587) — an explicit `any` on the callback param where the existing ownerRepoShape zod schema could type it, consistent with the file's existing style but still worth tightening opportunistically.
• The output schema's `manifest`/`policy` fields are typed as z.unknown() (src/mcp/server.ts) — fine for a thin mirror, but if the REST route's response shape is more concretely typed it'd be worth matching rather than opting out of schema validation.
• Confirm `compileFocusManifestPolicy` and `loadRepoFocusManifest` (imported at src/mcp/server.ts:173-174) return shapes consistent with what the REST route returns, since that parity is the core correctness claim of this PR.
• Consider extracting the repeated maintainer/owner/operator role-check block into a shared helper if a similar tool is added again, per repo#7800/loopover_get_activation_preview has a REST route but no remote MCP tool or local stdio MCP tool #7799 precedent of adding near-identical auth wrappers per tool.
• 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	#7808
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: 60 registered-repo PR(s), 33 merged, 0 issue(s).
Contributor context	✅ Confirmed Gittensor contributor	kai392; Gittensor profile; 60 PR(s), 0 issue(s).
Improvement	✅ Minor	risk: clean · value: minor

Linked issue satisfaction

Addressed
The PR registers loopover_get_repo_focus_manifest as both a remote MCP tool (with ownerRepoShape input, maintainer category, and a dedicated auth helper replicating requireAppRole([maintainer,owner,operator]) plus session-repo-access) and a local stdio tool proxying GET .../focus-manifest, matching the required two-surface pattern while explicitly avoiding refresh/PUT tools or a new CLI verb.

Review context

• Author: kai392
• Role context: outside_contributor
• Public audience mode: oss maintainer
• Lane context: Repository is configured for direct PR review.
• Public profile languages: JavaScript, Kotlin, Perl, TypeScript, Vue
• Official Gittensor activity: 60 PR(s), 0 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 (conflicts with the base branch — resolve and open a fresh PR). 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.