fix(go-pr-analysis): warn when custom_checks is enabled but empty

[bedatty]

Description

Two follow-ups from the CodeRabbit review on #625 (the develop → main promotion carrying #623 and #624).

1. custom_checks enabled but empty no longer skips silently

The job was gated on inputs.custom_checks != '', so a caller that set enable_custom_checks: true and forgot the list got a silently absent job — a gate reporting coverage it never provided. Dropped that clause from the if: and added an early guard in the run step:

if [ -z "${CUSTOM_CHECKS//[[:space:]]/}" ]; then
  echo "::warning::enable_custom_checks is true but custom_checks is empty — no checks ran"
  exit 0
fi

Whitespace-stripped, so a list containing only newlines warns too. Costs a runner spin-up on a misconfigured repo; that seemed clearly better than a gate that quietly claims to have run.

2. Corrected a misleading comment on the integration_test_command fallback

The comment claimed empty "falls through to go-pr-analysis's own default". It does not — the umbrella substitutes the same literal. The code is correct and load-bearing; only the comment was wrong.

The reviewer's proposed fix was to drop the fallback and pass the input through as-is. That would break callers: a reusable-workflow default applies only when the input is omitted, and a with: mapping cannot conditionally omit a key. An empty string therefore arrives at go-pr-analysis as '', and its integration-tests job does run: ${{ inputs.integration_test_command }} — an empty run: is a workflow validation error. Every umbrella caller with enable_integration_tests: true and no explicit command would fail.

So the literal has to be repeated. The comment now says that, and says why, and flags it as a keep-in-sync duplicate.

Type of Change

• fix: Bug fix in a workflow (incorrect behavior, broken step, wrong condition)

Breaking Changes

None. Change 1 only affects a configuration that was previously a silent no-op — it now emits a warning and still exits 0, so no currently-passing PR starts failing. Change 2 is comment-only.

Testing

• YAML syntax validated locally
• Triggered a real workflow run on a caller repository using @this-branch or the beta tag
• Verified all existing inputs still work with default values
• Confirmed no secrets or tokens are printed in logs
• Checked that unrelated workflows are not affected

Parsed both workflows and asserted the custom-checks if: no longer references custom_checks, that the guard is the first thing in the run step, and that the forwarded integration_test_command expression is unchanged. Ran the guard's bash condition against three inputs — empty, newlines-only, and a real target list — confirming the first two warn and exit 0 while the third proceeds.

The happy path was already exercised end to end on LerianStudio/caradhras PR #34, where Custom Checks (caradhras) ran check-migrations, check-goroutines and check-e2e-vet and agreed with the bespoke jobs kept as a control on the same commit.

Related Issues

Follow-up to #623 / #624, reviewed on #625.

[coderabbitai]

Summary by CodeRabbit

• Bug Fixes

  • Custom checks now run when enabled and Go changes are detected, even when no specific check targets are configured.
  • Empty or whitespace-only custom check configurations are handled safely with a warning instead of causing failures.

• Documentation

  • Clarified integration test command configuration to prevent validation issues in reusable workflows.

Walkthrough

Changes

Custom checks execution

Layer / File(s)	Summary
Custom checks gating and empty-input handling .github/workflows/go-pr-analysis.yml	The custom-checks job runs when enabled and Go changes are detected, while empty or whitespace-only check lists produce a warning and successful exit.

Integration test command documentation

Layer / File(s)	Summary
Integration test default clarification .github/workflows/go-pr-validation.yml	Comments explain why the make test-integration default is repeated inline for the downstream workflow.

Estimated code review effort: 2 (Simple) | ~10 minutes

Possibly related PRs

• LerianStudio/github-actions-shared-workflows#623: Introduced the custom-checks behavior extended by this change.
• LerianStudio/github-actions-shared-workflows#625: Added the custom-checks inputs and job behavior updated here.

Suggested labels: workflow, golang, validate

Suggested reviewers: gandalf-at-lerian, fredcamaral

🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 5

✅ Passed checks (5 passed)

Check name	Status	Explanation
Title check	✅ Passed	The title matches the main behavior change: warning when custom_checks is enabled but empty.
Description check	✅ Passed	The description covers the affected workflows, behavior changes, type of change, breaking changes, testing, and related issues.
Docstring Coverage	✅ Passed	No functions found in the changed files to evaluate docstring coverage. Skipping docstring coverage check.
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

🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)

• Create PR with unit tests
• Commit unit tests in branch fix/custom-checks-empty-and-fallback-comment

---

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

[lerian-studio]

🛡️ CodeQL Analysis Results

Languages analyzed: actions

✅ No security issues found.

---

_{🔍 View full scan logs | 🛡️ Security tab}

[lerian-studio]

🔍 Lint Analysis

Check	Files Scanned	Status
YAML Lint	2 file(s)	✅ success
Action Lint	2 file(s)	✅ success
Pinned Actions	2 file(s)	✅ success
Markdown Link Check	no changes	⏭️ skipped
Spelling Check	2 file(s)	✅ success
Shell Check	2 file(s)	✅ success
README Check	2 file(s)	✅ success
Composite Schema	no changes	⏭️ skipped
Deployment Matrix	no changes	⏭️ skipped

---

_{🔍 View full scan logs}

[lerian-studio]

🔍 PR Validation Summary

✅ PR Mergeable — no blocking failures

Check	Status	Blocking
Source Branch	✅ success	yes
PR Title	✅ success	yes
PR Description	✅ success	yes
PR Size	✅ success	no
Auto Labels	✅ success	no
PR Metadata	✅ success	no

---

_{🔍 View workflow run}

[coderabbitai]

Warning

CodeRabbit couldn't request changes on this pull request because it doesn't have sufficient GitHub permissions.

Please grant CodeRabbit Pull requests: Read and write permission and re-run the review.

👉 Steps to fix this

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/go-pr-validation.yml:
- Around line 279-284: Complete the truncated explanatory comment above the
reusable workflow configuration by finishing the final sentence with a clear
reference to the downstream workflow, while preserving the existing explanation
and synchronization note.

🪄 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: Path: .coderabbit.yml

Review profile: ASSERTIVE

Plan: Pro

Run ID: b6c30d97-3c4b-4b94-b76c-b5441ee6fe1a

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 198eaac and e1bd3dd.

📒 Files selected for processing (2)

• .github/workflows/go-pr-analysis.yml
• .github/workflows/go-pr-validation.yml