fix(engine): add minRankAutotuneEnabled to the policy-spec dist-twin test's full-shape pin

[JSONbored]

Summary

#8270 added minRankAutotuneEnabled to AmsPolicySpec and updated the root vitest twin's full-shape pin, but missed this node:test dist twin — the engine workspace suite has been red on main since. Test-only, one line; the full engine suite passes with it (0 not ok). Caught by the next branch's full gate; fixing forward immediately per the fix-discovered-drift convention.

Validation

npm run test --workspace @loopover/engine exit 0, zero failures.

[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 92.16%. Comparing base (112ead6) to head (5852c93).
✅ All tests successful. No failed tests found.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #8283      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   92.16%   92.16%   -0.01%     
==========================================
  Files         788      788              
  Lines       79175    79175              
  Branches    23933    23933              
==========================================
- Hits        72974    72970       -4     
  Misses       5062     5062              
- Partials     1139     1143       +4     

Flag	Coverage Δ
shard-1	58.54% <ø> (-0.04%)	⬇️
shard-2	49.97% <ø> (-0.01%)	⬇️
shard-3	54.06% <ø> (-0.01%)	⬇️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.
see 1 file with indirect coverage changes

[loopover-orb]

Warning

⏸️ LoopOver review result - manual review recommended

_{Review updated: 2026-07-23 23:42:40 UTC}

1 file · 1 blocker · CI green · clean

⏸️ Suggested Action - Manual Review

• AI review could not be completed: The dual-model AI review did not return a usable verdict for this change.

Review summary
AI review could not be completed for this PR head. LoopOver is holding this PR for manual review instead of relying on deterministic signals alone.

Nits — 1 non-blocking

• AI review could not be completed — The gate is held for a human reviewer rather than passed automatically; it re-evaluates on the next update.

Concerns raised — review before merging

• No linked issue detected: No closing reference or linked issue number was found in the PR metadata/body. — If this PR is intended to solve an issue, link it explicitly in the PR body.

📋 Copy for AI agents — paste into your coding agent

Fix the following blocker(s) from this PR review:

1. No linked issue detected: No closing reference or linked issue number was found in the PR metadata/body. — If this PR is intended to solve an issue, link it explicitly in the PR body.

Decision drivers

• ❌ Code review — 1 blocker (no AI review ran — blocker is from a non-AI gate check)
• ❌ Gate result — Blocking (Repo-configured hard blocker found.)

Context & advisory signals — never blocks the verdict

Signal	Result	Evidence
Linked issue	✅ No-issue rationale	PR body explains why no issue is linked.
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 (no linked issue context).
Validation posture	✅ 25/25	PR body includes validation/test evidence.
Contributor workload	✅ 10/10	Author activity: 14 registered-repo PR(s), 14 merged, 242 issue(s).
Contributor context	✅ Confirmed Gittensor contributor	JSONbored; Gittensor profile; 14 PR(s), 242 issue(s).
Improvement	ℹ️ Insufficient signal	risk: clean · value: insufficient-signal

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: Python, TypeScript, Ruby, Go, MDX, Shell, Solidity, JavaScript
• Official Gittensor activity: 14 PR(s), 242 issue(s).
• PR-specific overlap: none found.

Contributor next steps

• Start here: 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.

🧪 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