fix(queue): thread deliveryId into runAgentMaintenancePlanAndExecute

[JSONbored]

Summary

• #2403 referenced args.deliveryId inside runAgentMaintenancePlanAndExecute, but that function's args type never declared or received the field — a typecheck break that reached main.
• Threads deliveryId through from the caller (maybeRunAgentMaintenance, which already has it) and backfills the ciCompletenessWarning field on 8 pre-existing LiveCiAggregate test mocks that predated that type's new required field.

Test plan

• npm run typecheck clean
• Full unsharded npm run test:coverage: 312 files / 5821 tests passing, no threshold failures
• npm audit --audit-level=moderate: 0 vulnerabilities
• New regression assertion in test/unit/queue.test.ts verifies deliveryId now actually lands in the github_app.ci_completeness_unverified audit event's metadata

[loopover-orb]

Warning

🟨🟨🟨🟨🟨🟨🟨🟨🟨🟨🟨🟨

⏸️ Gittensory review result - manual review recommended

_{Review updated: 2026-07-01 22:30:13 UTC}

4 files · 1 AI reviewer · no blockers · readiness 86/100 · CI pending · blocked

⏸️ Suggested Action - Manual Review

• Touches a guarded path — held for manual review

Review summary
The change correctly threads the queue job delivery id from `maybeRunAgentMaintenance` into `runAgentMaintenancePlanAndExecute`, which matches the described audit-metadata regression. The test updates are mostly mechanical backfills for the now-required `ciCompletenessWarning` field, and the new queue assertion verifies the real processor path rather than fabricating the audit payload. I do not see a reachable correctness defect in the visible diff.

Nits — 5 non-blocking

• nit: `test/unit/queue.test.ts:1372` uses `JSON.parse(audit?.metadata_json ?? "{}")`; add an explicit `expect(audit).toBeTruthy()` or parse `audit!.metadata_json` so a missing audit row fails at the cause instead of falling through to an empty object fallback.
• nit: `test/unit/queue.test.ts:1370` has a long historical regression comment that repeats the PR description; keeping the test name/assertion focused on the deliveryId propagation would make future failures easier to scan.
• In `test/unit/queue.test.ts:1372`, assert the audit row exists before parsing metadata so the regression test reports a missing audit event distinctly from missing metadata.
• In `test/unit/queue.test.ts:1370`, shorten the comment to the invariant being tested: deliveryId must be present in the `github_app.ci_completeness_unverified` audit metadata.
• Touches a guarded path — held for manual review — A maintainer must review and merge this change.

Signal	Result	Evidence
Code review	✅ No blockers	1 reviewer
Linked issue	⚠️ Missing	No linked issue or no-issue rationale found.
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 (size label size:XS; no linked issue context).
Validation posture	✅ 25/25	PR body includes validation/test evidence.
Contributor workload	✅ 10/10	Author activity: 65 registered-repo PR(s), 55 merged, 572 issue(s).
Contributor context	✅ Confirmed Gittensor contributor	JSONbored; Gittensor profile; 65 PR(s), 572 issue(s).
Gate result	⚠️ Not blocking	Advisory; not blocking this PR.

Review context

• Author: JSONbored
• Role context: owner (maintainer lane)
• Public audience mode: oss maintainer
• Lane context: Repository registration is not available in the local Gittensory cache.
• Public profile languages: not available
• Official Gittensor activity: 65 PR(s), 572 issue(s).
• PR-specific overlap: none found.

Contributor next steps

• Treat this as maintainer-lane context rather than normal contributor-lane activity.
• Explain no-issue PR.
• Triage stale or unlinked PRs.
• No action.
• Link the issue being solved, or explicitly explain why this is a no-issue PR.

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.

_{🟩 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 Gittensory, a quiet PR intelligence layer for OSS maintainers.

• Re-run Gittensory review

[codecov]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
⚠️ Please upload report for BASE (main@a79975c). Learn more about missing BASE report.
⚠️ Report is 1 commits behind head on main.
✅ All tests successful. No failed tests found.

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main    #2427   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage        ?   95.85%           
=======================================
  Files           ?      224           
  Lines           ?    25104           
  Branches        ?     9129           
=======================================
  Hits            ?    24064           
  Misses          ?      427           
  Partials        ?      613           

Files with missing lines	Coverage Δ
src/queue/processors.ts	91.38% <ø> (ø)

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• 📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.