ci(secret-scan): rename caller job key secret-scan -> scan (D243) - #36
Conversation
Secret-Scan-Floor (D243/D244) requires the context `scan / gitleaks` estate-wide. The caller job key here was `secret-scan`, which emits `secret-scan / gitleaks` and can never satisfy the floor. Rename only; the reusable pin and permissions are unchanged. actionlint output identical before and after. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_0136eszqrQ53Kj7aBH1D4rXK
|
Navigate logical layers of code changes, visualize relationships, and explore their blast radius. No actionable comments were generated in the recent review. 🎉 ℹ️ Recent review info⚙️ Run configurationConfiguration used: Organization UI Review profile: ASSERTIVE Plan: Advanced Run ID: 📒 Files selected for processing (1)
Included review availability: This review used your included allowance. Your plan provides up to 1 included review per hour; 0 remain after this review. 📜 Recent review details⏰ Context from checks skipped due to timeout. (17)
|
| Layer / File(s) | Summary |
|---|---|
Rename the workflow job key .github/workflows/secret-scanner.yml |
The job key changed from secret-scan to scan. The job configuration is unchanged. |
Priority: ⬇️ Low
Estimated code review effort: 1 (Trivial) | ~2 minutes
Change: Bug fix
Merge Risk: ⚪ Minimal · up to 14300
The workflow now reports scan / gitleaks without changing its configuration. No concrete merge blocker was found; registration in the external ruleset could not be confirmed.
Architecture Summary
Architecture risk: 🔵 Low · up to 14300
The changed surface does not map to a changed system, dependency edge, entrypoint, or external dependency.
Changed systems: None identified.
Architecture concerns
No architecture-level concerns identified.
Review details
Before / after behavior
- observed — Modified behavior in .github/workflows/secret-scanner.yml: The job key was renamed from
secret-scantoscan; the job configuration is unchanged.
🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 5
✅ Passed checks (5 passed)
| Check name | Status | Explanation |
|---|---|---|
| Title check | ✅ Passed | The title clearly identifies the CI job-key rename from secret-scan to scan, which is the main change. |
| Description check | ✅ Passed | The description accurately explains the job-key rename, the required scan / gitleaks context, and the unchanged workflow settings. |
| Docstring Coverage | ✅ Passed | No functions found in the changed files to evaluate docstring coverage. Skipping docstring coverage check. Docstring coverage is scoped to functions touched by this diff. Analyzed 0 functions across 0… |
| Linked Issues check | ✅ Passed | Check skipped because no linked issues were found for this pull request. |
| Out of Scope Changes check | ✅ Passed | Check skipped because no linked issues were found for this pull request. |
✨ Finishing Touches 💡 1
🛠️ Fix failing CI checks 💡
- Commit to this branch
- Create a new PR
- Autopilot · Keep fixing CodeRabbit findings and required CI, and resolving merge conflicts
Autopilot is currently an internal CodeRabbit preview.
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.
A rabbit saw the scanner name,
Now scan is shorter, just the same.
The workflow keeps its settings tight,
Its secrets and permissions right.
Then off I hop beneath the moon.
Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands.
What
Rename the secret-scanner caller job key
secret-scan→scanin.github/workflows/secret-scanner.yml, so the check context becomesscan / gitleaks— the context the estate Secret-Scan-Floor ruleset (D243/D244) requires. One-line change; reusable pin, triggers and permissions unchanged. actionlint output is identical before and after.Commit created via GraphQL
createCommitOnBranch(GitHub-signed, signature valid: true).🤖 Generated with Claude Code
https://claude.ai/code/session_0136eszqrQ53Kj7aBH1D4rXK