add pull-requests: read permission to verify-dockerfile workflow

[kernelsam]

The verify-dockerfile-refreshed-at-updated reusable workflow needs pull-requests: read to function correctly with the callers permissions.

[github-actions]

🤖 Claude Code Review

---

Code Review

PR Summary: Adds pull-requests: read permission to the verify-dockerfile-refreshed-at-updated.yaml workflow job.

---

Code Quality

Style Guide: ✅ Unable to fetch the remote style guide, but the YAML follows standard GitHub Actions formatting conventions consistent with the existing file structure.

No commented-out code: ✅ No commented-out code present.

Meaningful variable names: ✅ N/A — workflow configuration only.

DRY principle: ✅ N/A — single line addition.

Defects / Logic errors / Security: ✅ The change is minimal and correct. The pull-requests: read permission is a least-privilege addition scoped to the job level (not the top-level permissions: {}), which is appropriate. Adding this at the job level rather than the workflow level is the right approach since the workflow-level permissions block is already set to {} (deny all), and only the job that needs it gets the permission.

Project memory (.claude/CLAUDE.md): ✅ No .claude/CLAUDE.md found in the repository — nothing to evaluate.

---

Testing

Unit/integration tests: ✅ N/A — this is a CI workflow permission change with no testable logic.

Edge cases / Test coverage: ✅ N/A.

---

Documentation

README updated: ✅ N/A — no user-facing behavior change.

API docs updated: ✅ N/A.

Inline comments for complex logic: ✅ N/A — the change is self-explanatory.

CHANGELOG.md updated: ❌ The CHANGELOG.md exists but does not appear to include an entry for this change. The [Unreleased] section contains placeholder entries ("Thing 4", "Thing 5") that look like template artifacts rather than real entries. Whether a CHANGELOG entry is required for a CI-only permission fix depends on project policy, but it's worth confirming.

Markdown formatting (CommonMark/prettier): ✅ N/A — no markdown files were modified in this PR.

---

Security

No hardcoded credentials: ✅

Input validation: ✅ N/A.

Proper error handling: ✅ N/A.

No sensitive data in logs: ✅

License files (.lic / AQAAAD strings): ✅ None present.

Permission scope: ✅ pull-requests: read is the minimum necessary permission and is scoped to the job, not the workflow. This follows the principle of least privilege.

---

Summary

Category	Status
Code Quality	✅
Testing	✅ N/A
Documentation	❌ CHANGELOG not updated
Security	✅

One minor finding:

• CHANGELOG.md — The [Unreleased] section at line 9 still contains placeholder text ("Thing 4", "Thing 5") and no entry for this workflow permission fix. If the project requires changelog entries for CI changes, this should be addressed. The placeholder entries themselves may also be leftover template text that should be removed.

Overall this is a clean, minimal, and correct change.

Automated code review analyzing defects and coding standards

[github-actions]

Super-linter summary

Language	Validation result
CHECKOV	Pass ✅
GITHUB_ACTIONS	Pass ✅
GITHUB_ACTIONS_ZIZMOR	Pass ✅
GITLEAKS	Pass ✅
GIT_MERGE_CONFLICT_MARKERS	Pass ✅
JSCPD	Pass ✅
PRE_COMMIT	Pass ✅
SPELL_CODESPELL	Pass ✅
TRIVY	Pass ✅
YAML	Pass ✅
YAML_PRETTIER	Pass ✅

All files and directories linted successfully

For more information, see the GitHub Actions workflow run

Powered by Super-linter