Summary
The miner details page was originally designed as a reviewer-facing tool that enabled maintainers to evaluate a contributor's track record before merging their work. That context no longer applies. The link to miner profiles is no longer embedded in PR descriptions, so reviewers rarely land here anymore.
The page's actual audience is now miners themselves — people checking their scores, tracking tier progression, monitoring open PR risk, and understanding how their contributions translate into earnings.
UX still feels oriented toward an external evaluator rather than the person whose data it is.
All the underlying data is solid. coring breakdowns, tier unlock progress, credibility metrics, earnings estimates, per-repository performance, contribution activity, and individual PR details are all available and surfaced. The question is whether the page presents that data in the most useful, intuitive, and visually compelling way for a miner managing their own performance.
Motivation
Miners care about different things at different stages — a new contributor wants to understand what they need to unlock the next tier, while an established miner wants to monitor earnings and score trends. The current page treats everyone identically.
The page also serves as the primary hub where miners contextualize their scoring. Each PR has a composite score built from multiple multipliers (repository weight, credibility, issue bonuses, time decay, uniqueness), token-level code analysis (structural vs. leaf scoring), tier-specific breakdowns, and collateral mechanics for open PRs. This scoring data exists and is partially surfaced, but could be presented in ways that help miners actually understand why they earned what they earned and what levers they can pull to improve.
The current tables (PRs, repositories) also lack meaningful filtering, sorting, and search — making it difficult for active miners to find specific data. Some of the tabular data is redundant across sections (e.g., PR table vs. repositories table surface overlapping information). Consider whether every table earns its place, and whether the data could be consolidated or made more navigable.
Scope
- The miner details page and all its sub-components- Data access — filtering, sorting, and search across tables and data views
- Data presentation — all currently available API data should remain accessible; don't discard useful metrics
- Responsive behavior across desktop, tablet, and mobile viewports
- Navigation patterns to/from the page and to drill-down views should remain in tact.
API documentation is available at https://api.gittensor.io/swagger for understanding the available data and endpoints.
Task
Redesign the miner details page to serve as a miner's personal performance dashboard. The page should feel like it belongs to the miner — a place they want to come back to regularly to understand their standing, track progress, and identify opportunities.
All currently available data should probably remain accessible somewhere on the page, but it's your choice how to display this. I honestly expect a complete tear down and rebuild of these pages from the bottom-up. I want to see some creative, intuitive designs that are great for our miners.
Key Considerations
- Information hierarchy should reflect what miners actually care about most
- Scoring should be understandable — miners should be able to trace how a score was calculated and what factors influenced it
- Tier unlock progress should be clear and motivating
- The page should work well whether a miner has 3 PRs or 300
- Data should be easy to navigate — filtering, sorting, and search where it makes sense
- Visual design should feel modern, clean, and consistent with the rest of the application's theme
Preferences
- Creativity over conformity — don't just reshuffle the existing components. Rethink how the data should be organized and presented for this audience. Thoughtful, novel approaches to information architecture are valued.
- Clarity over density — if everything is emphasized, nothing is. Make deliberate choices about visual hierarchy.
- Self-explanatory design — tooltips and labels are fine, but the page should make sense at a glance without reading documentation.
- Production quality — this should look and feel polished, not like a prototype.
PR Submission Requirements
When submitting a PR for this issue:
- Design rationale: Explain your information architecture choices — why you organized the data the way you did and what miner workflows you optimized for.
- Screenshots: Include comparisons across desktop and mobile viewports. PRs without visual evidence will not be reviewed. Show off your features here.
- Data completeness: Confirm all currently available metrics remain accessible. If you intentionally omitted something, explain why.
- Follow all guidelines in
CONTRIBUTING.md.
- All existing tests must pass. Add tests for new behavior including edge cases.
Summary
The miner details page was originally designed as a reviewer-facing tool that enabled maintainers to evaluate a contributor's track record before merging their work. That context no longer applies. The link to miner profiles is no longer embedded in PR descriptions, so reviewers rarely land here anymore.
The page's actual audience is now miners themselves — people checking their scores, tracking tier progression, monitoring open PR risk, and understanding how their contributions translate into earnings.
UX still feels oriented toward an external evaluator rather than the person whose data it is.
All the underlying data is solid. coring breakdowns, tier unlock progress, credibility metrics, earnings estimates, per-repository performance, contribution activity, and individual PR details are all available and surfaced. The question is whether the page presents that data in the most useful, intuitive, and visually compelling way for a miner managing their own performance.
Motivation
Miners care about different things at different stages — a new contributor wants to understand what they need to unlock the next tier, while an established miner wants to monitor earnings and score trends. The current page treats everyone identically.
The page also serves as the primary hub where miners contextualize their scoring. Each PR has a composite score built from multiple multipliers (repository weight, credibility, issue bonuses, time decay, uniqueness), token-level code analysis (structural vs. leaf scoring), tier-specific breakdowns, and collateral mechanics for open PRs. This scoring data exists and is partially surfaced, but could be presented in ways that help miners actually understand why they earned what they earned and what levers they can pull to improve.
The current tables (PRs, repositories) also lack meaningful filtering, sorting, and search — making it difficult for active miners to find specific data. Some of the tabular data is redundant across sections (e.g., PR table vs. repositories table surface overlapping information). Consider whether every table earns its place, and whether the data could be consolidated or made more navigable.
Scope
API documentation is available at https://api.gittensor.io/swagger for understanding the available data and endpoints.
Task
Redesign the miner details page to serve as a miner's personal performance dashboard. The page should feel like it belongs to the miner — a place they want to come back to regularly to understand their standing, track progress, and identify opportunities.
All currently available data should probably remain accessible somewhere on the page, but it's your choice how to display this. I honestly expect a complete tear down and rebuild of these pages from the bottom-up. I want to see some creative, intuitive designs that are great for our miners.
Key Considerations
Preferences
PR Submission Requirements
When submitting a PR for this issue:
CONTRIBUTING.md.