The gap has never stayed empty for long, and what gets put into it is revealing.
In the nineteenth century Tituba became African, or half African, and acquired a repertoire: voodoo, obeah, fortune telling, a circle of girls in a kitchen learning forbidden arts from a servant. None of that is in the 1692 papers. It arrived through fiction, popular history and, later, drama and school teaching, and it has been extraordinarily durable. Ask most people what started Salem and they will describe that kitchen.
The reason it is durable is that it is useful. It supplies the crisis with a foreign origin. If the trouble came in from outside, carried by an enslaved woman with strange practices, then the Puritan community that hanged nineteen of its own neighbours, pressed one man to death and let others die in gaol is a victim of contamination rather than the author of what it did. That is a comfortable story and it is not true. The theology, the courts, the accusations and the executions were all local.
So the honest handling of the question has two parts, and they must not be merged. What has been asserted about her without evidence is marked false, because a great deal has been. What is genuinely unresolved is marked unresolved, with the best available reconstruction named and its limits stated, so that a historian with new material knows exactly where the gap is.
She is also, throughout, a person and not a plot device.