chore: update workflow permissions for github token

[PavelSBorisov]

Description:
Workflow permissions should be set to

permissions:
  contents: read
  checks: write

Related issue(s):

Fixes #3275

Notes for reviewer:
N/A

Checklist

• Documented (Code comments, README, etc.)
• Tested (unit, integration, etc.)

[github-actions]

Test Results

 19 files   -   6  239 suites   - 132   30m 0s ⏱️ - 5m 36s
609 tests  -  11  604 ✅ +  8  4 💤 ±0  1 ❌  - 19 
624 runs   - 344  619 ✅  - 321  4 💤  - 3  1 ❌  - 20 

For more details on these failures, see this check.

Results for commit d34b91a. ± Comparison against base commit e10ba94.

This pull request removes 12 and adds 1 tests. Note that renamed tests count towards both.

"after all" hook in "@web-socket-batch-1 eth_call" ‑ RPC Server Acceptance Tests Acceptance tests @web-socket-batch-1 eth_call "after all" hook in "@web-socket-batch-1 eth_call"
"before all" hook for "emits an approval event" ‑ RPC Server Acceptance Tests Acceptance tests @erc20 Acceptance Tests ERC20 Contract should behave like erc20 transfer from when the token owner is not the zero address when the recipient is not the zero address when the spender has enough allowance "before all" hook for "emits an approval event"
"before all" hook for "emits an approval event" ‑ RPC Server Acceptance Tests Acceptance tests @erc20 Acceptance Tests HTS token should behave like erc20 transfer from when the token owner is not the zero address when the recipient is not the zero address when the spender has enough allowance "before all" hook for "emits an approval event"
"before all" hook for "reverts" ‑ RPC Server Acceptance Tests Acceptance tests @erc20 Acceptance Tests ERC20 Contract should behave like erc20 transfer from when the token owner is not the zero address when the recipient is not the zero address when the spender does not have enough allowance when the token owner has enough balance "before all" hook for "reverts"
"before all" hook for "reverts" ‑ RPC Server Acceptance Tests Acceptance tests @erc20 Acceptance Tests HTS token should behave like erc20 transfer from when the token owner is not the zero address when the recipient is not the zero address when the spender does not have enough allowance when the token owner has enough balance "before all" hook for "reverts"
"before all" hook in "Debug API Test Suite" ‑ RPC Server Acceptance Tests Acceptance tests @api-batch-3 RPC Server Acceptance Tests Debug API Test Suite "before all" hook in "Debug API Test Suite"
"before each" hook for "reverts" ‑ RPC Server Acceptance Tests Acceptance tests @erc20 Acceptance Tests ERC20 Contract should behave like erc20 transfer from when the token owner is not the zero address when the recipient is not the zero address when the spender does not have enough allowance "before each" hook for "reverts"
"before each" hook for "reverts" ‑ RPC Server Acceptance Tests Acceptance tests @erc20 Acceptance Tests ERC20 Contract should behave like erc20 transfer from when the token owner is not the zero address when the recipient is the zero address "before each" hook for "reverts"
"before each" hook for "reverts" ‑ RPC Server Acceptance Tests Acceptance tests @erc20 Acceptance Tests HTS token should behave like erc20 transfer from when the token owner is not the zero address when the recipient is not the zero address when the spender does not have enough allowance "before each" hook for "reverts"
"before each" hook for "reverts" ‑ RPC Server Acceptance Tests Acceptance tests @erc20 Acceptance Tests HTS token should behave like erc20 transfer from when the token owner is not the zero address when the recipient is the zero address "before each" hook for "reverts"
…

"before all" hook in "@api-batch-2 RPC Server Acceptance Tests" ‑ RPC Server Acceptance Tests Acceptance tests @api-batch-2 RPC Server Acceptance Tests "before all" hook in "@api-batch-2 RPC Server Acceptance Tests"

♻️ This comment has been updated with latest results.

[sonarcloud]

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

[andrewb1269hg]

Looks good to me.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 77.89%. Comparing base (e10ba94) to head (d34b91a).
Report is 3 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main    #3284   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   77.89%   77.89%           
=======================================
  Files          66       66           
  Lines        4470     4470           
  Branches     1003     1003           
=======================================
  Hits         3482     3482           
  Misses        613      613           
  Partials      375      375           

Flag	Coverage Δ
config-service	98.14% <ø> (ø)
relay	78.64% <ø> (ø)
server	83.28% <ø> (ø)
ws-server	36.66% <ø> (ø)

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

---- 🚨 Try these New Features:

• Flaky Tests Detection - Detect and resolve failed and flaky tests
• JS Bundle Analysis - Avoid shipping oversized bundles