[ci] Update PR validation workflow

[nemesifier]

Checklist

• I have read the OpenWISP Contributing Guidelines and OpenWISP Anti AI Spam Policy.
• N/A. This GitHub Actions caller-workflow change has no local manual execution path.
• N/A. No application code changed.
• N/A. No user-facing behavior or documentation changed.

Reference to Existing Issue

Related to openwisp/openwisp-utils#716

Description of Changes

Adds edited and ready_for_review pull request events so the shared workflow promptly revalidates changed descriptions. Makes the concurrency key PR-specific so newer events cancel outdated validation runs.

Screenshot

N/A. This is a GitHub Actions workflow-only change.

[coderabbitai]

📝 Walkthrough

Walkthrough

The pull request automation workflow now runs for edited and ready_for_review events in addition to its existing triggers. Its concurrency group no longer includes the event action, so runs are grouped by repository and pull request number.

Estimated code review effort: 1 (Trivial) | ~2 minutes

🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 6 | ❌ 2

❌ Failed checks (2 warnings)

Check name	Status	Explanation	Resolution
Features	⚠️ Warning	Issue #709 is validated and accepted, but this PR only changes the workflow file; no docs or tests were added.	Add documentation for the new workflow behavior and add tests/coverage for the PR validation and cancellation logic.
Changes	⚠️ Warning	The workflow change is non-trivial, but no tests/validation were added for the new trigger and concurrency behavior.	Add workflow validation/tests for the new edited/ready_for_review trigger and PR-level concurrency cancellation; docs/screenshots aren’t applicable here.

✅ Passed checks (6 passed)

Check name	Status	Explanation
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.
Bug Fixes	✅ Passed	Workflow change fixes the trigger/concurrency root cause; regression tests are impractical for a GitHub Actions workflow fix.
General Rules	✅ Passed	Workflow-only change is consistent with repo patterns; no obvious security, performance, naming, formatting, or docs issues found.
Title check	✅ Passed	The title uses the required [ci] type and clearly summarizes the workflow validation update.
Description check	✅ Passed	The description follows the template sections and is mostly complete, though the issue reference is not in the exact Closes #format.

✨ Finishing Touches

🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)

• Create PR with unit tests
• Commit unit tests in branch ci/update-pr-validation-workflow

---

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.}

[coderabbitai]

Actionable comments posted: 1

🤖 Prompt for all review comments with AI agents

Verify each finding against current code. Fix only still-valid issues, skip the
rest with a brief reason, keep changes minimal, and validate.

Inline comments:
In @.github/workflows/bot-autoassign-pr-issue-link.yml:
- Line 4: Update the pull_request_target edited-event handling in the workflow
so the reusable issue-assignment job runs only when github.event.changes.body
indicates the PR body changed; preserve existing behavior for opened, reopened,
closed, and ready_for_review events while preventing title or base-branch edits
from triggering issue-link processing.

🪄 Autofix (Beta)

Fix all unresolved CodeRabbit comments on this PR:

• Push a commit to this branch (recommended)
• Create a new PR with the fixes

---

ℹ️ Review info

⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: Organization UI

Review profile: ASSERTIVE

Plan: Pro Plus

Run ID: 67fb50cf-d835-4e53-b832-bfc5155bd74c

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between ebc9021 and 8d74466.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)

• .github/workflows/bot-autoassign-pr-issue-link.yml

📜 Review details

⏰ Context from checks skipped due to timeout. (1)

• GitHub Check: Kilo Code Review

🧰 Additional context used

🧠 Learnings (2)

📚 Learning: 2026-02-24T16:24:55.443Z

Learnt from: nemesifier
Repo: openwisp/openwisp-controller PR: 1233
File: .github/workflows/backport.yml:22-22
Timestamp: 2026-02-24T16:24:55.443Z
Learning: In repositories within the OpenWISP organization, it is acceptable to reference reusable workflows from other OpenWISP-controlled repos using mutable refs (e.g., master) in .github/workflows. This is permissible due to the shared trust boundary within the organization. If applying this pattern, ensure the target repos are under the same organization and maintain awareness of potential breakages from upstream mutable refs; consider pinning to a tagged version for longer-term stability when appropriate.

Applied to files:

• .github/workflows/bot-autoassign-pr-issue-link.yml

📚 Learning: 2026-02-24T16:25:20.080Z

Learnt from: nemesifier
Repo: openwisp/openwisp-controller PR: 1233
File: .github/workflows/backport.yml:35-35
Timestamp: 2026-02-24T16:25:20.080Z
Learning: In .github/workflows/backport.yml, enforce that backport-on-comment triggers only for users with author_association MEMBE R or OWNER (COLLABORATOR excluded), reflecting maintainer feedback. Update the trigger condition to check author_association and restrict to MEMBERS/OWNERS; document rationale and PR `#1233` reference in code comments.

Applied to files:

• .github/workflows/bot-autoassign-pr-issue-link.yml

🪛 zizmor (1.28.0)

.github/workflows/bot-autoassign-pr-issue-link.yml

[error] 7-7: overly broad permissions (excessive-permissions): issues: write is overly broad at the workflow level

(excessive-permissions)

---

[warning] 7-7: permissions without explanatory comments (undocumented-permissions): needs an explanatory comment

(undocumented-permissions)

🔇 Additional comments (1)

.github/workflows/bot-autoassign-pr-issue-link.yml (1)

9-10: LGTM!