feat: implement issue #236 — Phase 5: Remaining gh-aw workflows (Docs Health, Dependency Advisory, Standards Sync, ContentTwin Audit) - #303
Merged
Conversation
… Health, Dependency Advisory, Standards Sync, ContentTwin Audit)
📝 WalkthroughWalkthroughThis PR implements Phase 5 of the GitHub Agentic Workflows (gh-aw) initiative, adding four independent workflows for automated org audits: daily ContentTwin content audits, PR-triggered dependency risk assessments, weekly docs health checks, and monthly standards compliance syncs. Each includes workflow YAML, Bash implementation scripts, documentation, scenario specs, and CI validation infrastructure. ChangesPhase 5 Agentic Workflows
Sequence Diagram(s)sequenceDiagram
participant Trigger as Schedule/Event
participant Workflow as GitHub Actions
participant Script as Bash Script
participant GH as GitHub API
participant Claude as Claude CLI
participant Output as GitHub Issue/Comment
Trigger->>Workflow: Event fires
Workflow->>Script: Invoke with env config
Script->>GH: Enumerate/query repos, files, PRs
Script->>Claude: Generate analysis/report
Script->>Output: Create/update issue or comment
Estimated code review effort🎯 3 (Moderate) | ⏱️ ~25 minutes Possibly related issues
Possibly related PRs
🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 4 | ❌ 1❌ Failed checks (1 warning)
✅ Passed checks (4 passed)
✏️ Tip: You can configure your own custom pre-merge checks in the settings. ✨ Finishing Touches📝 Generate docstrings
🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out. Comment |
Collaborator
Author
Dev-Lead — human-pr (no-changes)No changes were needed for this PR. |
6 tasks
donpetry-bot
previously approved these changes
May 20, 2026
donpetry-bot
left a comment
donpetry-bot
left a comment
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Automated review — APPROVED ✓
Risk: LOW
Reviewed commit: 41a34734ef6996133547ce1df4b40ea44b2f04a8
Review mode: triage-approved (single reviewer)
Summary
This PR implements Phase 5 of the gh-aw rollout, adding four new agentic workflows — Docs Health Check (P2), Dependency Advisory (P2), Standards Sync (P3), and ContentTwin Content Audit (P3). The change is entirely additive (18 new files, +2133/-0), composed of workflow YAML, shell scripts, scenario specs, docs, and a validator. The triage tier cleared this as low-risk and that assessment holds up under confirmation review.
Linked issue analysis
Links to and closes issue #236 (Phase 5: Remaining gh-aw workflows). All four backlog items in the issue are delivered with the expected artifacts per workflow (scenario spec → workflow YAML → script → docs). The issue's process note suggested implementing these as separate PRs, but the owner has explicitly acknowledged this bundled delivery in the issue ("Phase 5 complete — PR #303 fully passing"), so the deviation is accepted.
Findings
Security / Permissions (LOW):
- All third-party actions are SHA-pinned (
actions/checkout,setup-node,cache,github-script). Good. - Workflow permissions are minimal and scoped (
contents: read;issues: writeorpull-requests: writeonly where needed). dependency-advisory.ymltriggers onpull_request(notpull_request_target), so fork PR contents are not given access to repo secrets — safe.- Secrets used:
CLAUDE_CODE_OAUTH_TOKEN,DON_PETRY_BOT_GH_PAT,GH_PAT_WORKFLOWS. None are echoed or interpolated into shell strings; all pass through env orghCLI. - Scripts use
set -euo pipefail(validated bytests/aw/validate-specs.sh).
Code quality (LOW):
- Each workflow has
concurrencyandtimeout-minutesconfigured. - Reports are truncated to 60 000 bytes before being attached to issues — protects against GitHub body-size limits.
- Scripts implement dedup/idempotency (existing-issue and existing-PR checks before creating new ones).
- Portable date arithmetic with GNU/BSD fallbacks in
aw-docs-health-check.shandaw-content-twin-audit.sh. aw-standards-sync.shfilters archived repos and supports aSKIP_REPOSallowlist.
Minor observations (non-blocking):
aw-docs-health-check.shenumerates only the top-leveldocs/directory; nested doc trees are not walked. Matches the scope in the scenario spec, but worth noting for future iteration.aw-standards-sync.shwill start opening PRs across the whole org on the next first-Monday firing (0 9 1-7 * 1). TheSKIP_REPOSandexisting-PRchecks should contain blast radius, and the workflow isworkflow_dispatch-able for a manual dry-run before the first scheduled execution.
CI status
All checks green: CodeQL (Analyze actions), SonarCloud (Quality Gate passed, 0 new issues), AgentShield, Lint (shellcheck + bats), Tests (unit-tests), Dependency audit (skipped — no ecosystem changes), Test AW Workflows (validate-specs + shellcheck-aw-scripts), Dev-Lead Agent dispatch. Dependabot-automerge and pr-review-mention skipped as expected. CodeRabbit hit a rate limit but its absence is not blocking.
Reviewed automatically by the PR-review agent (single-reviewer mode: opus 4.7). Reply if you need a human review.
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Pull request overview
Adds the remaining Phase 5 “gh-aw” workflows (Docs Health, Dependency Advisory, Standards Sync, ContentTwin Audit) to this repo, including scenario specs, operator docs, implementation scripts, and a CI workflow to validate the spec/doc/workflow/script bundle.
Changes:
- Introduces four new GitHub Actions workflows and their corresponding
scripts/aw-*.shimplementations. - Adds TDD-style scenario specs under
tests/aw/**and operator documentation underdocs/aw/**. - Adds a
test-aw.ymlworkflow +validate-specs.shto enforce that each AW workflow has its required spec/doc/workflow/script artifacts.
Reviewed changes
Copilot reviewed 18 out of 18 changed files in this pull request and generated 10 comments.
Show a summary per file
| File | Description |
|---|---|
tests/aw/validate-specs.sh |
New validator script to enforce spec/doc/yaml/script presence and basic checks. |
tests/aw/standards-sync/scenarios.md |
Scenario spec for monthly cross-repo standards synchronization. |
tests/aw/docs-health-check/scenarios.md |
Scenario spec for weekly stale-docs detection and reporting. |
tests/aw/dependency-advisory/scenarios.md |
Scenario spec for PR dependency change risk assessment. |
tests/aw/content-twin-audit/scenarios.md |
Scenario spec for daily ContentTwin pipeline health auditing. |
scripts/aw-standards-sync.sh |
Implements scanning repos for required files and opening PRs + a summary issue. |
scripts/aw-docs-health-check.sh |
Implements stale-doc detection and Claude report generation. |
scripts/aw-dependency-advisory.sh |
Implements diff extraction and Claude-generated PR advisory comments. |
scripts/aw-content-twin-audit.sh |
Implements ContentTwin health checks and issue open/update behavior. |
docs/aw/standards-sync.md |
Operator documentation for the standards sync workflow. |
docs/aw/docs-health-check.md |
Operator documentation for the docs health check workflow. |
docs/aw/dependency-advisory.md |
Operator documentation for the dependency advisory workflow. |
docs/aw/content-twin-audit.md |
Operator documentation for the ContentTwin audit workflow. |
.github/workflows/test-aw.yml |
CI workflow to run the validator and shellcheck AW scripts. |
.github/workflows/standards-sync.yml |
Monthly scheduled workflow to run standards sync script. |
.github/workflows/docs-health-check.yml |
Weekly scheduled workflow to run docs health check and open issues. |
.github/workflows/dependency-advisory.yml |
PR-triggered workflow for dependency advisory comments. |
.github/workflows/content-twin-audit.yml |
Daily scheduled workflow to run ContentTwin audit script. |
Comments suppressed due to low confidence (2)
scripts/aw-content-twin-audit.sh:82
- Scenario spec requires the “empty queue” condition to open an issue only if it persists for more than 1 day, but the script flags
queue_empty=trueand proceeds to open/update an issue immediately on the first empty run. Implement persistence (e.g., check prior audit issue timestamp/state or store a sentinel) before treating an empty queue as an issue.
echo "Checking content queue..."
queue_empty=false
queue_files=$(gh api "repos/${CONTENT_TWIN_REPO}/contents/queue" \
--jq 'length' 2>/dev/null || echo "0")
if [ "$queue_files" = "0" ] || [ -z "$queue_files" ]; then
queue_empty=true
echo " Queue is empty (0 items in queue/)"
else
echo " Queue has ${queue_files} item(s)"
fi
scripts/aw-content-twin-audit.sh:100
- The audit report inputs only include failed run links and dates; it doesn’t extract any failure reason/details from the failed runs (scenario expects a summarized error reason, not just URLs). Consider querying the run’s jobs/steps (or conclusion/message fields where available) for failed runs and passing a brief failure summary into the Claude prompt/issue body.
publish_runs=$(gh api \
"repos/${CONTENT_TWIN_REPO}/actions/workflows/${PUBLISH_WORKFLOW}/runs?per_page=20&created=>=${LOOKBACK_CUTOFF}" \
--jq '.workflow_runs | map({id: .id, conclusion: .conclusion, created_at: .created_at, html_url: .html_url, run_number: .run_number})' \
2>/dev/null || echo '[]')
failed_runs=$(echo "$publish_runs" | jq -r '[.[] | select(.conclusion == "failure")] | length')
total_runs=$(echo "$publish_runs" | jq -r 'length')
failed_run_urls=$(echo "$publish_runs" | jq -r \
'[.[] | select(.conclusion == "failure") | "- [Run #\(.run_number)](\(.html_url)) — failed at \(.created_at[:10])"] | .[]' \
2>/dev/null || true)
💡 Add Copilot custom instructions for smarter, more guided reviews. Learn how to get started.
Comment on lines
+1
to
+13
| name: Test AW Workflows | ||
|
|
||
| on: | ||
| pull_request: | ||
| paths: | ||
| - 'tests/aw/**' | ||
| - 'docs/aw/**' | ||
| - 'scripts/aw-*.sh' | ||
| - '.github/workflows/docs-health-check.yml' | ||
| - '.github/workflows/dependency-advisory.yml' | ||
| - '.github/workflows/standards-sync.yml' | ||
| - '.github/workflows/content-twin-audit.yml' | ||
| - '.github/workflows/test-aw.yml' |
![gemini-code-assist[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/956858?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Code Review
This pull request introduces a suite of automated workflows for organizational maintenance, including content auditing, dependency risk assessment, documentation health checks, and standards synchronization. Each workflow is supported by comprehensive documentation, shell scripts, and test scenarios. The review feedback focuses on enhancing the robustness of the shell scripts by addressing GitHub API pagination limits, implementing recursive directory scanning for documentation audits, and utilizing temporary files for large API payloads to avoid potential command-line argument length restrictions.
![chatgpt-codex-connector[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/1144995?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: 41a34734ef
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub
Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
- Open a pull request for review
- Mark a draft as ready
- Comment "@codex review".
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.
Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: 635c79c42e
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub
Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
- Open a pull request for review
- Mark a draft as ready
- Comment "@codex review".
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.
Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: d19a22c65b
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub
Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
- Open a pull request for review
- Mark a draft as ready
- Comment "@codex review".
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.
Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".
Collaborator
Author
Dev-Lead — fix-reviews (applied)Changes committed and pushed. |
don-petry
dismissed stale reviews from coderabbitai[bot] and donpetry-bot
via
May 20, 2026 05:26
83d2dc1
Collaborator
Author
Dev-Lead — human-pr (no-changes)No changes were needed for this PR. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: 83d2dc13cb
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub
Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
- Open a pull request for review
- Mark a draft as ready
- Comment "@codex review".
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.
Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".
Collaborator
Author
Dev-Lead — fix-reviews (applied)Changes committed and pushed. |
don-petry
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 3, 2026
… Health, Dependency Advisory, Standards Sync, ContentTwin Audit) (#303) * feat: implement issue #236 — Phase 5: Remaining gh-aw workflows (Docs Health, Dependency Advisory, Standards Sync, ContentTwin Audit) * fix(reviews): address review comments [skip ci-relay] * fix(reviews): address review comments [skip ci-relay] * fix(reviews): address review comments [skip ci-relay] --------- Co-authored-by: donpetry-bot <donpetry-bot@users.noreply.github.com>
don-petry
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 3, 2026
The `content-twin-audit.yml` gh-aw workflow is a product-specific pipeline health check for the `petry-projects/ContentTwin` repo (content freshness, queue depth, publish.yml failures). That kind of product monitoring does not belong in `.github-private`, which is the org's CI/automation infrastructure repo. Its signals are meaningful only for a content-publishing pipeline and do not generalize; the org-wide hygiene needs (docs, deps, standards) are already covered by the generic sibling workflows that shipped in the same PR (#303). Removes the workflow, its script, doc, and test scenarios, and de-lists it from test-aw.yml, validate-specs.sh, copilot-instructions.md, and the two README workflow indexes. Leaves every reference to ContentTwin-the-product repo (release rings, deploy targets, pr-review consumers) untouched. Verified content-twin-audit was the only product-scoped health check; all other scheduled workflows target org-infrastructure repos or are generic. Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
don-petry
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 7, 2026
… Health, Dependency Advisory, Standards Sync, ContentTwin Audit) (#303) * feat: implement issue #236 — Phase 5: Remaining gh-aw workflows (Docs Health, Dependency Advisory, Standards Sync, ContentTwin Audit) * fix(reviews): address review comments [skip ci-relay] * fix(reviews): address review comments [skip ci-relay] * fix(reviews): address review comments [skip ci-relay] --------- Co-authored-by: donpetry-bot <donpetry-bot@users.noreply.github.com>
don-petry
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 7, 2026
The `content-twin-audit.yml` gh-aw workflow is a product-specific pipeline health check for the `petry-projects/ContentTwin` repo (content freshness, queue depth, publish.yml failures). That kind of product monitoring does not belong in `.github-private`, which is the org's CI/automation infrastructure repo. Its signals are meaningful only for a content-publishing pipeline and do not generalize; the org-wide hygiene needs (docs, deps, standards) are already covered by the generic sibling workflows that shipped in the same PR (#303). Removes the workflow, its script, doc, and test scenarios, and de-lists it from test-aw.yml, validate-specs.sh, copilot-instructions.md, and the two README workflow indexes. Leaves every reference to ContentTwin-the-product repo (release rings, deploy targets, pr-review consumers) untouched. Verified content-twin-audit was the only product-scoped health check; all other scheduled workflows target org-infrastructure repos or are generic. Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
don-petry
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 7, 2026
… Health, Dependency Advisory, Standards Sync, ContentTwin Audit) (#303) * feat: implement issue #236 — Phase 5: Remaining gh-aw workflows (Docs Health, Dependency Advisory, Standards Sync, ContentTwin Audit) * fix(reviews): address review comments [skip ci-relay] * fix(reviews): address review comments [skip ci-relay] * fix(reviews): address review comments [skip ci-relay] --------- Co-authored-by: donpetry-bot <donpetry-bot@users.noreply.github.com>
don-petry
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 7, 2026
The `content-twin-audit.yml` gh-aw workflow is a product-specific pipeline health check for the `petry-projects/ContentTwin` repo (content freshness, queue depth, publish.yml failures). That kind of product monitoring does not belong in `.github-private`, which is the org's CI/automation infrastructure repo. Its signals are meaningful only for a content-publishing pipeline and do not generalize; the org-wide hygiene needs (docs, deps, standards) are already covered by the generic sibling workflows that shipped in the same PR (#303). Removes the workflow, its script, doc, and test scenarios, and de-lists it from test-aw.yml, validate-specs.sh, copilot-instructions.md, and the two README workflow indexes. Leaves every reference to ContentTwin-the-product repo (release rings, deploy targets, pr-review consumers) untouched. Verified content-twin-audit was the only product-scoped health check; all other scheduled workflows target org-infrastructure repos or are generic. Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
don-petry
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 7, 2026
… Health, Dependency Advisory, Standards Sync, ContentTwin Audit) (#303) * feat: implement issue #236 — Phase 5: Remaining gh-aw workflows (Docs Health, Dependency Advisory, Standards Sync, ContentTwin Audit) * fix(reviews): address review comments [skip ci-relay] * fix(reviews): address review comments [skip ci-relay] * fix(reviews): address review comments [skip ci-relay] --------- Co-authored-by: donpetry-bot <donpetry-bot@users.noreply.github.com>
don-petry
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 7, 2026
The `content-twin-audit.yml` gh-aw workflow is a product-specific pipeline health check for the `petry-projects/ContentTwin` repo (content freshness, queue depth, publish.yml failures). That kind of product monitoring does not belong in `.github-private`, which is the org's CI/automation infrastructure repo. Its signals are meaningful only for a content-publishing pipeline and do not generalize; the org-wide hygiene needs (docs, deps, standards) are already covered by the generic sibling workflows that shipped in the same PR (#303). Removes the workflow, its script, doc, and test scenarios, and de-lists it from test-aw.yml, validate-specs.sh, copilot-instructions.md, and the two README workflow indexes. Leaves every reference to ContentTwin-the-product repo (release rings, deploy targets, pr-review consumers) untouched. Verified content-twin-audit was the only product-scoped health check; all other scheduled workflows target org-infrastructure repos or are generic. Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
don-petry
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 7, 2026
… Health, Dependency Advisory, Standards Sync, ContentTwin Audit) (#303) * feat: implement issue #236 — Phase 5: Remaining gh-aw workflows (Docs Health, Dependency Advisory, Standards Sync, ContentTwin Audit) * fix(reviews): address review comments [skip ci-relay] * fix(reviews): address review comments [skip ci-relay] * fix(reviews): address review comments [skip ci-relay] --------- Co-authored-by: donpetry-bot <donpetry-bot@users.noreply.github.com>
don-petry
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 7, 2026
The `content-twin-audit.yml` gh-aw workflow is a product-specific pipeline health check for the `petry-projects/ContentTwin` repo (content freshness, queue depth, publish.yml failures). That kind of product monitoring does not belong in `.github-private`, which is the org's CI/automation infrastructure repo. Its signals are meaningful only for a content-publishing pipeline and do not generalize; the org-wide hygiene needs (docs, deps, standards) are already covered by the generic sibling workflows that shipped in the same PR (#303). Removes the workflow, its script, doc, and test scenarios, and de-lists it from test-aw.yml, validate-specs.sh, copilot-instructions.md, and the two README workflow indexes. Leaves every reference to ContentTwin-the-product repo (release rings, deploy targets, pr-review consumers) untouched. Verified content-twin-audit was the only product-scoped health check; all other scheduled workflows target org-infrastructure repos or are generic. Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
don-petry
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 7, 2026
… Health, Dependency Advisory, Standards Sync, ContentTwin Audit) (#303) * feat: implement issue #236 — Phase 5: Remaining gh-aw workflows (Docs Health, Dependency Advisory, Standards Sync, ContentTwin Audit) * fix(reviews): address review comments [skip ci-relay] * fix(reviews): address review comments [skip ci-relay] * fix(reviews): address review comments [skip ci-relay] --------- Co-authored-by: donpetry-bot <donpetry-bot@users.noreply.github.com>
don-petry
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 7, 2026
The `content-twin-audit.yml` gh-aw workflow is a product-specific pipeline health check for the `petry-projects/ContentTwin` repo (content freshness, queue depth, publish.yml failures). That kind of product monitoring does not belong in `.github-private`, which is the org's CI/automation infrastructure repo. Its signals are meaningful only for a content-publishing pipeline and do not generalize; the org-wide hygiene needs (docs, deps, standards) are already covered by the generic sibling workflows that shipped in the same PR (#303). Removes the workflow, its script, doc, and test scenarios, and de-lists it from test-aw.yml, validate-specs.sh, copilot-instructions.md, and the two README workflow indexes. Leaves every reference to ContentTwin-the-product repo (release rings, deploy targets, pr-review consumers) untouched. Verified content-twin-audit was the only product-scoped health check; all other scheduled workflows target org-infrastructure repos or are generic. Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
don-petry
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 7, 2026
… Health, Dependency Advisory, Standards Sync, ContentTwin Audit) (#303) * feat: implement issue #236 — Phase 5: Remaining gh-aw workflows (Docs Health, Dependency Advisory, Standards Sync, ContentTwin Audit) * fix(reviews): address review comments [skip ci-relay] * fix(reviews): address review comments [skip ci-relay] * fix(reviews): address review comments [skip ci-relay] --------- Co-authored-by: donpetry-bot <donpetry-bot@users.noreply.github.com>
don-petry
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 7, 2026
The `content-twin-audit.yml` gh-aw workflow is a product-specific pipeline health check for the `petry-projects/ContentTwin` repo (content freshness, queue depth, publish.yml failures). That kind of product monitoring does not belong in `.github-private`, which is the org's CI/automation infrastructure repo. Its signals are meaningful only for a content-publishing pipeline and do not generalize; the org-wide hygiene needs (docs, deps, standards) are already covered by the generic sibling workflows that shipped in the same PR (#303). Removes the workflow, its script, doc, and test scenarios, and de-lists it from test-aw.yml, validate-specs.sh, copilot-instructions.md, and the two README workflow indexes. Leaves every reference to ContentTwin-the-product repo (release rings, deploy targets, pr-review consumers) untouched. Verified content-twin-audit was the only product-scoped health check; all other scheduled workflows target org-infrastructure repos or are generic. Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
don-petry
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 7, 2026
… Health, Dependency Advisory, Standards Sync, ContentTwin Audit) (#303) * feat: implement issue #236 — Phase 5: Remaining gh-aw workflows (Docs Health, Dependency Advisory, Standards Sync, ContentTwin Audit) * fix(reviews): address review comments [skip ci-relay] * fix(reviews): address review comments [skip ci-relay] * fix(reviews): address review comments [skip ci-relay] --------- Co-authored-by: donpetry-bot <donpetry-bot@users.noreply.github.com>
don-petry
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 7, 2026
… Health, Dependency Advisory, Standards Sync, ContentTwin Audit) (#303) * feat: implement issue #236 — Phase 5: Remaining gh-aw workflows (Docs Health, Dependency Advisory, Standards Sync, ContentTwin Audit) * fix(reviews): address review comments [skip ci-relay] * fix(reviews): address review comments [skip ci-relay] * fix(reviews): address review comments [skip ci-relay] --------- Co-authored-by: donpetry-bot <donpetry-bot@users.noreply.github.com>
don-petry
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 7, 2026
The `content-twin-audit.yml` gh-aw workflow is a product-specific pipeline health check for the `petry-projects/ContentTwin` repo (content freshness, queue depth, publish.yml failures). That kind of product monitoring does not belong in `.github-private`, which is the org's CI/automation infrastructure repo. Its signals are meaningful only for a content-publishing pipeline and do not generalize; the org-wide hygiene needs (docs, deps, standards) are already covered by the generic sibling workflows that shipped in the same PR (#303). Removes the workflow, its script, doc, and test scenarios, and de-lists it from test-aw.yml, validate-specs.sh, copilot-instructions.md, and the two README workflow indexes. Leaves every reference to ContentTwin-the-product repo (release rings, deploy targets, pr-review consumers) untouched. Verified content-twin-audit was the only product-scoped health check; all other scheduled workflows target org-infrastructure repos or are generic. Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
don-petry
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 7, 2026
… Health, Dependency Advisory, Standards Sync, ContentTwin Audit) (#303) * feat: implement issue #236 — Phase 5: Remaining gh-aw workflows (Docs Health, Dependency Advisory, Standards Sync, ContentTwin Audit) * fix(reviews): address review comments [skip ci-relay] * fix(reviews): address review comments [skip ci-relay] * fix(reviews): address review comments [skip ci-relay] --------- Co-authored-by: donpetry-bot <donpetry-bot@users.noreply.github.com>
don-petry
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 7, 2026
The `content-twin-audit.yml` gh-aw workflow is a product-specific pipeline health check for the `petry-projects/ContentTwin` repo (content freshness, queue depth, publish.yml failures). That kind of product monitoring does not belong in `.github-private`, which is the org's CI/automation infrastructure repo. Its signals are meaningful only for a content-publishing pipeline and do not generalize; the org-wide hygiene needs (docs, deps, standards) are already covered by the generic sibling workflows that shipped in the same PR (#303). Removes the workflow, its script, doc, and test scenarios, and de-lists it from test-aw.yml, validate-specs.sh, copilot-instructions.md, and the two README workflow indexes. Leaves every reference to ContentTwin-the-product repo (release rings, deploy targets, pr-review consumers) untouched. Verified content-twin-audit was the only product-scoped health check; all other scheduled workflows target org-infrastructure repos or are generic. Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
don-petry
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 7, 2026
The `content-twin-audit.yml` gh-aw workflow is a product-specific pipeline health check for the `petry-projects/ContentTwin` repo (content freshness, queue depth, publish.yml failures). That kind of product monitoring does not belong in `.github-private`, which is the org's CI/automation infrastructure repo. Its signals are meaningful only for a content-publishing pipeline and do not generalize; the org-wide hygiene needs (docs, deps, standards) are already covered by the generic sibling workflows that shipped in the same PR (#303). Removes the workflow, its script, doc, and test scenarios, and de-lists it from test-aw.yml, validate-specs.sh, copilot-instructions.md, and the two README workflow indexes. Leaves every reference to ContentTwin-the-product repo (release rings, deploy targets, pr-review consumers) untouched. Verified content-twin-audit was the only product-scoped health check; all other scheduled workflows target org-infrastructure repos or are generic. Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
don-petry
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 7, 2026
… Health, Dependency Advisory, Standards Sync, ContentTwin Audit) (#303) * feat: implement issue #236 — Phase 5: Remaining gh-aw workflows (Docs Health, Dependency Advisory, Standards Sync, ContentTwin Audit) * fix(reviews): address review comments [skip ci-relay] * fix(reviews): address review comments [skip ci-relay] * fix(reviews): address review comments [skip ci-relay] --------- Co-authored-by: donpetry-bot <donpetry-bot@users.noreply.github.com>
don-petry
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 7, 2026
The `content-twin-audit.yml` gh-aw workflow is a product-specific pipeline health check for the `petry-projects/ContentTwin` repo (content freshness, queue depth, publish.yml failures). That kind of product monitoring does not belong in `.github-private`, which is the org's CI/automation infrastructure repo. Its signals are meaningful only for a content-publishing pipeline and do not generalize; the org-wide hygiene needs (docs, deps, standards) are already covered by the generic sibling workflows that shipped in the same PR (#303). Removes the workflow, its script, doc, and test scenarios, and de-lists it from test-aw.yml, validate-specs.sh, copilot-instructions.md, and the two README workflow indexes. Leaves every reference to ContentTwin-the-product repo (release rings, deploy targets, pr-review consumers) untouched. Verified content-twin-audit was the only product-scoped health check; all other scheduled workflows target org-infrastructure repos or are generic. Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
don-petry
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 8, 2026
… Health, Dependency Advisory, Standards Sync, ContentTwin Audit) (#303) * feat: implement issue #236 — Phase 5: Remaining gh-aw workflows (Docs Health, Dependency Advisory, Standards Sync, ContentTwin Audit) * fix(reviews): address review comments [skip ci-relay] * fix(reviews): address review comments [skip ci-relay] * fix(reviews): address review comments [skip ci-relay] --------- Co-authored-by: donpetry-bot <donpetry-bot@users.noreply.github.com>
don-petry
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 8, 2026
The `content-twin-audit.yml` gh-aw workflow is a product-specific pipeline health check for the `petry-projects/ContentTwin` repo (content freshness, queue depth, publish.yml failures). That kind of product monitoring does not belong in `.github-private`, which is the org's CI/automation infrastructure repo. Its signals are meaningful only for a content-publishing pipeline and do not generalize; the org-wide hygiene needs (docs, deps, standards) are already covered by the generic sibling workflows that shipped in the same PR (#303). Removes the workflow, its script, doc, and test scenarios, and de-lists it from test-aw.yml, validate-specs.sh, copilot-instructions.md, and the two README workflow indexes. Leaves every reference to ContentTwin-the-product repo (release rings, deploy targets, pr-review consumers) untouched. Verified content-twin-audit was the only product-scoped health check; all other scheduled workflows target org-infrastructure repos or are generic. Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
don-petry
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 8, 2026
… Health, Dependency Advisory, Standards Sync, ContentTwin Audit) (#303) * feat: implement issue #236 — Phase 5: Remaining gh-aw workflows (Docs Health, Dependency Advisory, Standards Sync, ContentTwin Audit) * fix(reviews): address review comments [skip ci-relay] * fix(reviews): address review comments [skip ci-relay] * fix(reviews): address review comments [skip ci-relay] --------- Co-authored-by: donpetry-bot <donpetry-bot@users.noreply.github.com>
don-petry
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 8, 2026
The `content-twin-audit.yml` gh-aw workflow is a product-specific pipeline health check for the `petry-projects/ContentTwin` repo (content freshness, queue depth, publish.yml failures). That kind of product monitoring does not belong in `.github-private`, which is the org's CI/automation infrastructure repo. Its signals are meaningful only for a content-publishing pipeline and do not generalize; the org-wide hygiene needs (docs, deps, standards) are already covered by the generic sibling workflows that shipped in the same PR (#303). Removes the workflow, its script, doc, and test scenarios, and de-lists it from test-aw.yml, validate-specs.sh, copilot-instructions.md, and the two README workflow indexes. Leaves every reference to ContentTwin-the-product repo (release rings, deploy targets, pr-review consumers) untouched. Verified content-twin-audit was the only product-scoped health check; all other scheduled workflows target org-infrastructure repos or are generic. Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
don-petry
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 8, 2026
… Health, Dependency Advisory, Standards Sync, ContentTwin Audit) (#303) * feat: implement issue #236 — Phase 5: Remaining gh-aw workflows (Docs Health, Dependency Advisory, Standards Sync, ContentTwin Audit) * fix(reviews): address review comments [skip ci-relay] * fix(reviews): address review comments [skip ci-relay] * fix(reviews): address review comments [skip ci-relay] --------- Co-authored-by: donpetry-bot <donpetry-bot@users.noreply.github.com>
don-petry
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 8, 2026
The `content-twin-audit.yml` gh-aw workflow is a product-specific pipeline health check for the `petry-projects/ContentTwin` repo (content freshness, queue depth, publish.yml failures). That kind of product monitoring does not belong in `.github-private`, which is the org's CI/automation infrastructure repo. Its signals are meaningful only for a content-publishing pipeline and do not generalize; the org-wide hygiene needs (docs, deps, standards) are already covered by the generic sibling workflows that shipped in the same PR (#303). Removes the workflow, its script, doc, and test scenarios, and de-lists it from test-aw.yml, validate-specs.sh, copilot-instructions.md, and the two README workflow indexes. Leaves every reference to ContentTwin-the-product repo (release rings, deploy targets, pr-review consumers) untouched. Verified content-twin-audit was the only product-scoped health check; all other scheduled workflows target org-infrastructure repos or are generic. Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
don-petry
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 8, 2026
… Health, Dependency Advisory, Standards Sync, ContentTwin Audit) (#303) * feat: implement issue #236 — Phase 5: Remaining gh-aw workflows (Docs Health, Dependency Advisory, Standards Sync, ContentTwin Audit) * fix(reviews): address review comments [skip ci-relay] * fix(reviews): address review comments [skip ci-relay] * fix(reviews): address review comments [skip ci-relay] --------- Co-authored-by: donpetry-bot <donpetry-bot@users.noreply.github.com>
don-petry
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 8, 2026
The `content-twin-audit.yml` gh-aw workflow is a product-specific pipeline health check for the `petry-projects/ContentTwin` repo (content freshness, queue depth, publish.yml failures). That kind of product monitoring does not belong in `.github-private`, which is the org's CI/automation infrastructure repo. Its signals are meaningful only for a content-publishing pipeline and do not generalize; the org-wide hygiene needs (docs, deps, standards) are already covered by the generic sibling workflows that shipped in the same PR (#303). Removes the workflow, its script, doc, and test scenarios, and de-lists it from test-aw.yml, validate-specs.sh, copilot-instructions.md, and the two README workflow indexes. Leaves every reference to ContentTwin-the-product repo (release rings, deploy targets, pr-review consumers) untouched. Verified content-twin-audit was the only product-scoped health check; all other scheduled workflows target org-infrastructure repos or are generic. Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Closes #236
Implemented by dev-lead agent. Please review.
Summary by CodeRabbit
New Features
Documentation
Tests