Skip to content

feat: skip PR description check for bot-authored PRs - #17

Open
LuWang1983 wants to merge 1 commit into
masterfrom
task/INFR-6089/exempt-bot-prs-from-description-check
Open

feat: skip PR description check for bot-authored PRs#17
LuWang1983 wants to merge 1 commit into
masterfrom
task/INFR-6089/exempt-bot-prs-from-description-check

Conversation

@LuWang1983

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

ℹ️ Overview

  • skip description validation for bot-authored PRs (user.type === 'Bot') so the check can be made required without blocking Dependabot/etc.
  • keep the exemption in-script (not a caller if) so the job still reports success instead of staying pending
  • document that callers must always invoke the callable workflow

Relates to INFR-6089.

🤖 Coding AI Authorship

  • Human-authored: written almost entirely by hand; maybe some autocomplete, sourced code or scaffolding.
  • Co-authored: agent wrote meaningful portions, significantly edited by me.
  • AI-authored: nearly all agent-authored with minimal human edits if any.
    AI added bot skip + caller docs; operator directed and reviewed.

🧪 Test Instructions

  1. Merge this PR
  2. Open a bot-authored PR (or simulate user.type === Bot payload) against a repo calling this workflow — check should pass without Overview content
  3. Open a human PR with empty/REPLACE ME Overview — check should still fail
  4. Confirm callers do not gate the job with if: user.type != 'Bot'

Test Results

Not yet run — pending merge.

📝 Authoring Guidelines

As the author, I verify that I have:

  • Followed the test instructions and updated the test results.
  • Added/updated unit tests as applicable.
  • Added/updated documentation as applicable.

🚨 Risks

  • Other core setup (please clarify below)

Required-check behavior depends on callers always invoking this workflow. A caller-level skip would leave bot PRs pending.

Detect bot authors via user.type so required description checks still pass
without a caller-level job skip that would leave the status pending.
@Jarvis-Alloy

Copy link
Copy Markdown

@LuWang1983
LuWang1983 marked this pull request as ready for review August 27, 2026 17:31
@LuWang1983
LuWang1983 requested a review from a team August 27, 2026 21:48
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants