fix(metrics): include GraphQL discussion activity in engagement score

[nyxsky404]

User description

Summary

/api/metrics/devtrack-badges always returned discussions.count/points: 0 because the score used a hardcoded placeholder. This wires up the same GraphQL contributionsCollection fields used by /api/metrics/discussions (discussion + discussion-comment counts for the last 30 days) and folds them into the weighted breakdown (* 2, capped at 15). GraphQL failures soft-fail to 0 so the rest of the score still returns.

Closes #3352

---

Type of Change

• Bug fix (non-breaking change that fixes an issue)
• New feature (non-breaking change that adds functionality)
• Breaking change (fix or feature that changes existing behavior)
• Documentation update
• Refactor / code cleanup (no functional change)
• Performance improvement
• Security fix
• Tests only

---

What Changed

• Added GraphQL discussion contribution fetch in src/app/api/metrics/devtrack-badges/route.ts
• Included real discussion count/points in the community engagement breakdown
• Added unit coverage for users with activity, without activity, and GraphQL failure

---

How to Test

1. Sign in with a GitHub account that has discussion or discussion-comment activity in the last 30 days
2. Call GET /api/metrics/devtrack-badges
3. Confirm breakdown.discussions.count and points are non-zero and total includes those points
4. For an account with no discussion activity, confirm discussions stay at 0 while other categories still populate

Expected result:

Discussions reflect real GitHub contribution data instead of a permanent zero placeholder.

---

Checklist

• Linked the related issue above
• Self-reviewed my own diff
• No unnecessary console.log, debug code, or commented-out blocks
• npm run lint passes locally
• No TypeScript errors (npm run type-check)
• Added or updated tests where applicable
• Updated documentation / comments if behavior changed

---

Additional Context

Weight matches issuesOpened (count * 2, max 15). Overall score still clamps to 100.

Made with Cursor

---

CodeAnt-AI Description

Include GitHub Discussions activity in community engagement scores

What Changed

• Community engagement metrics now count discussions and discussion comments from the last 30 days
• Discussion activity contributes up to 15 points to the engagement score and appears in the returned breakdown
• GitHub API failures leave discussion points at zero without preventing the rest of the score from loading
• Added coverage for active users, users without discussion activity, authentication failures, and API errors

Impact

✅ Accurate discussion engagement scores
✅ Discussion activity reflected in user breakdowns
✅ Engagement metrics remain available during GitHub API failures

💡 Usage Guide

Checking Your Pull Request

Every time you make a pull request, our system automatically looks through it. We check for security issues, mistakes in how you're setting up your infrastructure, and common code problems. We do this to make sure your changes are solid and won't cause any trouble later.

Talking to CodeAnt AI

Got a question or need a hand with something in your pull request? You can easily get in touch with CodeAnt AI right here. Just type the following in a comment on your pull request, and replace "Your question here" with whatever you want to ask:

@codeant-ai ask: Your question here

This lets you have a chat with CodeAnt AI about your pull request, making it easier to understand and improve your code.

Example

@codeant-ai ask: Can you suggest a safer alternative to storing this secret?

Preserve Org Learnings with CodeAnt

You can record team preferences so CodeAnt AI applies them in future reviews. Reply directly to the specific CodeAnt AI suggestion (in the same thread) and replace "Your feedback here" with your input:

@codeant-ai: Your feedback here

This helps CodeAnt AI learn and adapt to your team's coding style and standards.

Example

@codeant-ai: Do not flag unused imports.

Retrigger review

Ask CodeAnt AI to review the PR again, by typing:

@codeant-ai: review

Check Your Repository Health

To analyze the health of your code repository, visit our dashboard at https://app.codeant.ai. This tool helps you identify potential issues and areas for improvement in your codebase, ensuring your repository maintains high standards of code health.

[Copilot]

Copilot was unable to review this pull request because the user who requested the review has reached their quota limit.

[github-actions]

GSSoC Label Checklist 🏷️

@Priyanshu-byte-coder — please apply the appropriate labels before merging:

Difficulty (pick one):

• level:beginner — 20 pts
• level:intermediate — 35 pts
• level:advanced — 55 pts
• level:critical — 80 pts

Quality (optional):

• quality:clean — ×1.2 multiplier
• quality:exceptional — ×1.5 multiplier

Validation (required to score):

• gssoc:approved — counts for points
• gssoc:invalid / gssoc:spam / gssoc:ai-slop — does not score

Type labels (type:*) are auto-detected from files and title. Review and adjust if needed.
Points formula: (difficulty × quality_multiplier) + type_bonus

[nyxsky404]

@Priyanshu-byte-coder please review pr and merge it, i have also fixed the ci failures

[nyxsky404]

Hi @Priyanshu-byte-coder — gentle nudge.

This PR is ready for review from my side. I've rebased/kept it current where possible. If CI is red due to unrelated upstream/main issues or deploy previews, the code change itself should still be reviewable.

Please review and merge when you can — and add gssoc:approved (+ difficulty/type) if appropriate so it can count for GSSoC.

Thank you!

[codeant-ai]

🤖 CodeAnt AI — Review Status

Status	Commit	Started (UTC)	Finished (UTC)
✅ Reviewed your PR	3b8fd03	Aug 17, 2026 · 17:13	17:16

[nyxsky404]

Merged current main to clear the conflicts. This branch had picked up the same extra files as #3174/#3362 (automated-tests.yml plus the modal tweaks that #3499 already shipped), so those are dropped. The PR is now only the GraphQL discussion activity wiring in devtrack-badges plus its unit tests.

[github-actions]

This PR has been inactive for 21 days. If it is still in progress, please leave an update — otherwise it will be closed in 7 days.

[PriyanshuValura]

Good fix. discussionsPoints was hardcoded to 0 behind a // placeholder — GitHub Discussions API requires GraphQL comment, so the Community Champion score silently ignored a whole contribution category. Using contributionsCollection with totalDiscussionContributions + totalDiscussionCommentContributions is the right call — that's the only place GitHub exposes those counts.

Two things you got right that are easy to get wrong:

• Fails safe on every path. Non-OK response, GraphQL errors array, and a thrown request all return 0. A Discussions hiccup can't take down the whole badges endpoint, which matters because the other five metrics are unrelated.
• Kept the failure isolation while parallelising. Wrapping the existing Promise.allSettled inside Promise.all alongside fetchDiscussionCount means the GraphQL call runs concurrently with the five REST searches instead of after them, and the per-search allSettled semantics are untouched. Easy to accidentally collapse that into one Promise.all and make any single search failure fatal.

Verified against current main: merges clean, type-check clean, 163 files / 2387 tests passing.

On CI: Analyze (javascript-typescript) was failing, but it wasn't your code — CodeQL hit a GitHub-side outage (No server is currently available to service your request) on 17 Aug. I re-ran the job and it passes.

Minor, not blocking: session.accessToken! leans on the non-null assertion, which is safe here only because of the early return above it. const token = session.accessToken after the guard would let the compiler prove it instead.

Merged.

[github-actions]

🎉 Merged! Thanks for contributing to DevTrack.

If the project has been useful to you, a ⭐ star on the repo is the easiest way to support it — it helps DevTrack get discovered by more developers.

Keep an eye on open issues for your next contribution!