feat: implement issue #301 — Compliance: non-stub-feature-ideation.yml

[don-petry]

Closes #301

Implemented by dev-lead agent. Please review.

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

You have reached your Codex usage limits for code reviews. You can see your limits in the Codex usage dashboard.
To continue using code reviews, you can upgrade your account or add credits to your account and enable them for code reviews in your settings.

[coderabbitai]

Warning

Review limit reached

@don-petry, you've reached your PR review limit, so we couldn't start this review.

Next review available in: 9 minutes

Enable usage-based reviews in Billing to review now. Otherwise, wait until the next included review is available.
You're only billed for reviews past your plan's rate limits ($0.25/file).

How can I continue?

After more reviews become available, a review can be triggered using the @coderabbitai review command as a PR comment. Alternatively, push new commits to this PR.

To avoid repeated limits, reduce automatic review volume by pausing incremental auto-reviews earlier, using label-based review opt-in, excluding WIP or generated PR titles, or requesting reviews manually when the PR is ready. If your team needs uninterrupted high-volume reviews, an organization admin can enable usage-based reviews.

How do review limits work?

CodeRabbit enforces per-developer PR review limits for each organization. Most developers receive the normal plan review availability.

For paid Pro and Pro+ PR reviews, CodeRabbit uses adaptive limits for sustained high-volume activity. When a developer's recent PR review activity reaches the 95th percentile or higher among CodeRabbit users, additional reviews become available more gradually as earlier reviews age out of the rolling window.

Please refer docs for additional details.

Review details

⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: Path: .coderabbit.yaml

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro

Run ID: 064ce61c-bb9f-470d-9fb9-88f73775c096

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 761efb9 and 4b35a52.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)

• .github/workflows/feature-ideation.yml

✨ Finishing Touches

🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)

• Create PR with unit tests
• Commit unit tests in branch dev-lead/issue-301-20260703-1423

---

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.

❤️ Share

• X
• Mastodon
• Reddit
• LinkedIn

_{Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands.}

[gemini-code-assist]

Note

Gemini is unable to generate a review for this pull request due to the file types involved not being currently supported.

[sonarqubecloud]

Quality Gate passed

Issues
0 New issues
0 Accepted issues

Measures
0 Security Hotspots
0.0% Coverage on New Code
0.0% Duplication on New Code

See analysis details on SonarQube Cloud

[Copilot]

Pull request overview

This PR aims to address compliance issue #301 by updating the repo’s feature-ideation.yml workflow stub that delegates to the org-wide reusable feature ideation workflow.

Changes:

• Added additional workflow_dispatch inputs (enhance_backlog, target_discussion) and a discussion → workflow_dispatch “redispatch” bridge job.
• Updated the reusable-workflow uses: pin to a different commit SHA (still labeled # v1).

[don-petry]

No change needed here. The current file is byte-for-byte identical to the canonical stub at petry-projects/.github/standards/workflows/feature-ideation.yml (confirmed via diff). The canonical standard was updated to include the enhance_backlog and target_discussion inputs as well as the redispatch bridge job — so those additions are upstream, not deviations from it.

[don-petry]

No change needed here. The canonical stub at petry-projects/.github/standards/workflows/feature-ideation.yml itself uses @e20a8fac1b6a10bd6ad0999258e88a423f890ba6 # v1 (SHA pin with a v1 comment), and the current file is byte-for-byte identical to that template. SHA pinning is also intentional — it follows GitHub's supply-chain security guidance to prevent a compromised tag from injecting malicious code. Switching to a floating @v1 tag would diverge from the canonical template (contradicting Thread 1) and reduce security posture. If the canonical needs updating to a newer SHA, that change belongs in petry-projects/.github and will propagate to all callers on next sync.

[don-petry]

Closing this conflicted (DIRTY) PR — main has evolved since it was generated (2026-07-03/07), so a hand-merge would drag stale code over main's newer version. Driving issue #301 keeps its dev-lead label, so this regenerates cleanly against current main (cap-gated, no work lost). (feature-ideation stub sync)