fix(grafana): escape AI usage SQL variables

[JSONbored]

Motivation

• Close a SQL-injection confidentiality hole in the consolidated AI usage Grafana dashboard by preventing raw template-variable interpolation into SQLite queries.
• Ensure the dashboard continues to be filterable by provider/feature/model while using Grafana's SQL-safe formatting to avoid URL-controlled query injection.

Description

• Replaced raw '$provider', '$feature', and '$model' interpolations with Grafana ${provider:sqlstring}, ${feature:sqlstring}, and ${model:sqlstring} formatting across grafana/dashboards/ai-usage.json (template variable model query and all ai_usage_events targets).
• Updated the unit test test/unit/selfhost-grafana-ai-usage-dashboard.test.ts to simulate Grafana SQL-string escaping by adding sqlString() and substituteSqlString() helpers and to assert the dashboard now uses ${...:sqlstring} rather than raw '$...' tokens.
• Added a regression-style test that injects a quote-bearing URL-controlled payload and verifies it remains inside a quoted SQL string rather than enabling clause/UNION tricks.
• Kept observability validation in place by running the repository's dashboard/schema checks to ensure the modified dashboard JSON remains syntactically valid for self-host deployment.

Testing

• Ran npx vitest run test/unit/selfhost-grafana-ai-usage-dashboard.test.ts and all tests in that file passed (10 tests passing).
• Ran npm run selfhost:validate-observability and the observability config validation completed successfully (dashboards and alert rules are valid).
• Ran git diff --check as part of preflight and it reported no whitespace/conflict issues.
• Attempted npm run test:ci but it did not complete cleanly due to a pre-existing cf-typegen:check drift message and an actionlint setup retry caused by a transient DNS/network issue, so the full test:ci gate was not green in this environment.
• Attempted npm audit --audit-level=moderate but the npm registry audit endpoint returned 403 Forbidden, so the dependency-review step could not be completed here.

---

Codex Task

[superagent-security]

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

[loopover-orb]

Warning

🟨🟨🟨🟨🟨🟨🟨🟨🟨🟨🟨🟨

⏸️ Gittensory review result - manual review recommended

_{Review updated: 2026-07-12 21:39:15 UTC}

2 files · 2 blockers · readiness 89/100 · CI pending · blocked

⏸️ Suggested Action - Manual Review

Concerns raised — review before merging

• No linked issue detected — If this PR is intended to solve an issue, link it explicitly in the PR body.
• Maintainer requires a linked issue — Link the relevant issue (for example Closes #123) before opening the PR.

📋 Copy for AI agents — paste into your coding agent

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

1. No linked issue detected — If this PR is intended to solve an issue, link it explicitly in the PR body.

2. Maintainer requires a linked issue — Link the relevant issue (for example `Closes #123`) before opening the PR.

Signal	Result	Evidence
Code review	❌ 2 blockers	No AI review summary
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 (draft PR; no linked issue context).
Validation posture	✅ 25/25	PR body includes validation/test evidence.
Contributor workload	✅ 10/10	Author activity: 44 registered-repo PR(s), 36 merged, 435 issue(s).
Contributor context	✅ Confirmed Gittensor contributor	JSONbored; Gittensor profile; 44 PR(s), 435 issue(s).
Gate result	❌ Blocking	Repo-configured hard blocker found.
Improvement	⚠️ ℹ️ Insufficient signal	risk: clean · value: insufficient-signal — Nothing measurable for the structural-improvement analyzers on this PR (e.g. no code files changed).

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), 435 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.
• Mark ready when done.
• 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.

[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

_{🟩 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.
✅ Project coverage is 94.67%. Comparing base (ecb18c1) to head (e721ac6).
⚠️ Report is 1 commits behind head on main.
✅ All tests successful. No failed tests found.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #5354      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   94.71%   94.67%   -0.04%     
==========================================
  Files         555      555              
  Lines       44526    44526              
  Branches    14664    14664              
==========================================
- Hits        42172    42155      -17     
- Misses       1619     1636      +17     
  Partials      735      735              

Flag	Coverage Δ
shard-1	43.77% <ø> (-0.25%)	⬇️
shard-2	35.22% <ø> (-0.01%)	⬇️
shard-3	32.07% <ø> (+0.06%)	⬆️
shard-4	31.56% <ø> (-0.53%)	⬇️
shard-5	33.12% <ø> (+0.39%)	⬆️
shard-6	43.75% <ø> (+0.27%)	⬆️

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

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

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