Trigger PR requirements check on ready_for_review#18
Merged
Conversation
When a PR is opened as draft and later marked ready for review, the job-level if filter only matched opened/reopened/edited, so the requirements check (and unmet-requirements label) was never applied. The downstream effect was that draft-then-ready PRs slipped past auto-screening. Add ready_for_review to: - the job-level if (gates whether the job runs at all) - spam detection step - same-author resubmission detection step - fast-track qualifying step - large-PR detection step - the final unmet-requirements label/comment step The header comment is updated to reflect the new expected triggers. The 'edited && contains unmet-requirements' branch and the 'requirements_met && edited' label-removal step are unchanged. Those are correctly scoped to edits of already-screened PRs. Companion change in cli/cli/.github/workflows/triage-pull-requests.yml adds ready_for_review to its check-requirements job filter so that this workflow is actually invoked on the event. Co-authored-by: Copilot <223556219+Copilot@users.noreply.github.com>
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Pull request overview
This PR updates the reusable PR-requirements triage workflow so that PRs opened as drafts and later marked Ready for review still go through the same external-PR requirements screening as when they are first opened.
Changes:
- Extend the
check-requirementsjob-levelif:to also run onpull_request_target.ready_for_review(while still skipping drafts and internal PRs). - Extend the action-gated screening steps (spam detection, resubmission detection, fast-track qualification, large-PR detection, unmet-requirements labeling/commenting) to also run on
ready_for_review. - Update the workflow header comment and job comment to reflect the additional expected trigger.
Show a summary per file
| File | Description |
|---|---|
.github/workflows/triage-pr-requirements.yml |
Ensures the PR requirements check and associated screening behaviors run when a draft PR transitions to ready-for-review. |
Copilot's findings
Tip
Add Copilot custom instructions for smarter, more guided reviews. Learn how to get started.
- Files reviewed: 1/1 changed files
- Comments generated: 0
tidy-dev
approved these changes
May 8, 2026
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.
PRs opened as draft and later marked ready for review slip past auto-screening because the
check-requirementsjob'sif:only matchedopened/reopened/edited. The open event correctly skips drafts; the subsequentready_for_reviewevent wasn't handled; andeditedcan't recover because that branch requiresunmet-requirementsto already be present.Adds
ready_for_reviewto the job-levelif:and to all five action-gated steps inside the job. Theedited && contains unmet-requirementsbranch and therequirements_met && editedlabel-removal step are intentionally unchanged.Related PRs
Consumer-side fixes that add
ready_for_reviewto their calling workflows so this one is actually invoked on the event: