docs(review): fix docs pages that describe checkRunMode/reviewCheckMode backwards

[JSONbored]

Summary

• docs.how-reviews-work.tsx:298-301 claimed checkRunMode publishes the "Gittensory Orb Review Agent" check — backwards; it publishes "Gittensory Context".
• docs.github-app.tsx:149-152 claimed both checks are controlled by checkRunMode — false for the Gate check, and self-contradicts the same file's own correct statement 15 lines later that reviewCheckMode is the gate's authority.
• src/review/repo-profile.ts's gatePublishesCheck doc lumped live checkRunMode in with genuinely-deprecated gateCheckMode as "legacy" — scoped that claim correctly.
• Added a JSDoc to checkRunMode (previously had none) cross-referencing reviewCheckMode.
• Removed the stale deep checkRunDetailLevel option from 3 docs pages — the type was narrowed to minimal | standard in Resolve dead config branches (wire or remove) #4620, "deep" was never removed from prose.

Scope

Docs/comment-only: docs.how-reviews-work.tsx, docs.github-app.tsx, docs.tuning.tsx, src/review/repo-profile.ts, src/types.ts.

Validation

• npm run typecheck — clean
• npm run ui:typecheck — clean
• npx vitest run test/unit/docs-github-app.test.ts test/unit/check-docs-drift-script.test.ts — 35/35 passing (the existing assertions on unchanged nearby text still hold)
• npm run docs:drift-check — clean

Safety

No behavior change, docs/comments only.

Closes #5283

[superagent-security]

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

[cloudflare-workers-and-pages]

Deploying with    Cloudflare Workers

The latest updates on your project. Learn more about integrating Git with Workers.

Status	Name	Latest Commit	Preview URL	Updated (UTC)
✅ Deployment successful! View logs	gittensory-ui	10417c9	Commit Preview URL Branch Preview URL	Jul 12 2026, 01:33 PM

[codecov]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 94.37%. Comparing base (d56f4ec) to head (10417c9).
⚠️ Report is 7 commits behind head on main.
✅ All tests successful. No failed tests found.

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main    #5301   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   94.37%   94.37%           
=======================================
  Files         474      474           
  Lines       40128    40128           
  Branches    14631    14631           
=======================================
  Hits        37869    37869           
  Misses       1583     1583           
  Partials      676      676           

Flag	Coverage Δ
shard-1	46.28% <ø> (-0.15%)	⬇️
shard-2	34.74% <ø> (+0.03%)	⬆️
shard-3	32.17% <ø> (+0.10%)	⬆️
shard-4	31.85% <ø> (-0.26%)	⬇️
shard-5	33.45% <ø> (-0.24%)	⬇️
shard-6	45.07% <ø> (+0.23%)	⬆️

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

Files with missing lines	Coverage Δ
src/review/repo-profile.ts	100.00% <ø> (ø)
src/types.ts	100.00% <ø> (ø)

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

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

[gittensory-orb]

Tip

🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩

✅ Gittensory review result - approve/merge recommended

_{Review updated: 2026-07-12 13:36:32 UTC}

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

✅ Suggested Action - Approve/Merge

• safe to merge

Review summary
This is a docs/comment-only correction fixing backwards descriptions of checkRunMode vs reviewCheckMode across docs.github-app.tsx, docs.how-reviews-work.tsx, docs.tuning.tsx, plus clarifying JSDoc in repo-profile.ts and types.ts, and removing the stale 'deep' checkRunDetailLevel option that was narrowed to minimal|standard in #4620. The corrected text in both docs.github-app.tsx and docs.how-reviews-work.tsx now consistently attributes the Orb Review Agent check to reviewCheckMode and the Context check to checkRunMode, resolving the self-contradiction called out in the PR description. It closes issue #5283 and the change is well-scoped to exactly the drift it claims to fix.

Nits — 7 non-blocking

• src/review/repo-profile.ts:60 introduces the magic reference 'Reduce redundant config surface: linked-issue knob, gateCheckMode, label fields #4618' inline in a JSDoc comment without further context — acceptable for a comment but worth double-checking the issue number is correct since it's now load-bearing documentation.
• No test changes accompany this PR (0 test files), but since this is a pure docs/comment change with no behavior difference, that's expected rather than a gap — confirm docs-drift-check (mentioned in Validation) actually asserts on this corrected text going forward.
• Consider adding or updating a docs-drift-check assertion (test/unit/check-docs-drift-script.test.ts) that specifically pins the corrected checkRunMode/reviewCheckMode attribution in prose, so a future regression is caught automatically rather than relying on manual review.
• In docs.tuning.tsx and docs.github-app.tsx, since checkRunMode and reviewCheckMode are now explained as independent axes in two separate places, consider linking one canonical explanation (e.g., a shared Callout) to avoid the two prose blocks drifting out of sync again.
• nit: src/types.ts:706 references the README section as the canonical disambiguation point, but this PR only updates route docs and comments; confirm that README section already says the same thing or make it the single source of truth too.
• PR author also opened the linked issue — Link an issue that was opened by a different contributor, or provide a rationale for why this self-authored issue represents genuine discovery work.
• Code changes lack test evidence — Add focused regression tests or explain why existing coverage is sufficient.

Signal	Result	Evidence
Code review	✅ No blockers	1 reviewer
Linked issue	✅ Linked	#5283
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: 44 registered-repo PR(s), 36 merged, 476 issue(s).
Contributor context	✅ Confirmed Gittensor contributor	JSONbored; Gittensor profile; 44 PR(s), 476 issue(s).
Gate result	✅ Passing	No configured blocker found.
Improvement	⚠️ ℹ️ None detected	risk: low · value: none — No structural-improvement signals were detected for this PR.

Review context

• Author: JSONbored
• Role context: owner (maintainer lane)
• Public audience mode: oss maintainer
• Lane context: Repository is configured for direct PR review.
• Public profile languages: not available
• Official Gittensor activity: 44 PR(s), 476 issue(s).
• PR-specific overlap: none found.

Contributor next steps

• Treat this as maintainer-lane context rather than normal contributor-lane activity.

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.

[BETA] Chat with Gittensory

Ask Gittensory a question about this PR directly in a comment — grounded only in the same cached, public-safe facts shown above, never a new claim.

• @gittensory ask <question> answers contribution-quality Q&A with source citations and freshness.
• @gittensory chat <question> answers in natural prose from cached decision-pack facts via local inference (maintainer/collaborator; read-only).
• A plain-language @gittensory mention with a real question is routed to the closest matching read-only command automatically -- no exact syntax required.

Full command reference: https://gittensory.aethereal.dev/docs/gittensory-commands

Visual preview

Route	Viewport	Before (production)	After (this PR's preview)	Diff
/docs/github-app	desktop			—
/docs/github-app	mobile			—
/docs/how-reviews-work	desktop			—
/docs/how-reviews-work	mobile			—

Click any thumbnail to open the full-size screenshot. Before = production · After = this PR's preview deploy.

_{🟩 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