[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 Makes the concurrency key PR-specific so newer events cancel outdated validation runs.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 bot workflow now triggers for edited and ready_for_review pull request events in addition to its existing actions. Its concurrency group now groups runs by repository and pull request number regardless of the triggering action. Permissions remain unchanged.

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

Possibly related PRs

• openwisp/openwisp-radius#718: Introduced the workflow concurrency grouping that this change simplifies.

🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 8

✅ Passed checks (8 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-only fix to PR validation trigger/concurrency; regression tests are impractical for GitHub Actions workflows, so the bug-fix test requirements don’t apply.
Features	✅ Passed	Workflow-only change in .github/workflows; no product feature/UI/docs/tests/screenshot requirements are applicable.
Changes	✅ Passed	Workflow-only CI change; no UI, docs, or public API impact, and the repo has no workflow test harness to update.
General Rules	✅ Passed	Workflow-only change; no security, performance, naming, docs, or test issues found, and AGENTS.md adds no conflicting rules.
Title check	✅ Passed	The title is descriptive, uses the required [ci] prefix, and matches the workflow validation changes.
Description check	✅ Passed	The description mostly matches the template and covers checklist, changes, and screenshots, but it lacks a proper Closes #issue-number reference.

✨ 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.}

[kilo-code-bot]

Code Review Summary

Status: No Issues Found | Recommendation: Merge

Files Reviewed (1 file)

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

---

_{Reviewed by ling-3.0-flash-free · Input: 21K · Output: 10.9K · Cached: 199.4K}

[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:
- Around line 5-8: Move the workflow-level permissions block into the
auto-assign-issue job as jobs.auto-assign-issue.permissions, preserving
contents: read, issues: write, and pull-requests: read so only the
reusable-workflow caller job receives these permissions.

🪄 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: b16a1168-da7d-4f32-aafb-e9075996d791

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 6c4baf4 and 38b53a1.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)

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

📜 Review details

⏰ Context from checks skipped due to timeout. (2)

• GitHub Check: Analyze (actions)
• GitHub Check: Kilo Code Review

🧰 Additional context used

🧠 Learnings (1)

📚 Learning: 2026-03-06T08:47:54.428Z

Learnt from: stktyagi
Repo: openwisp/openwisp-radius PR: 689
File: .github/workflows/bot-ci-failure.yml:60-60
Timestamp: 2026-03-06T08:47:54.428Z
Learning: In openwisp/openwisp-radius and similar OpenWISP repos, reusable workflow caller files intentionally reference upstream reusable workflows with master (e.g., openwisp/openwisp-utils/.github/workflows/reusable-bot-ci-failure.ymlmaster). This is by design to ensure callers always use the latest changes from the master branch of the upstream project. Do not flag such references as security or pinning issues during code reviews. If applying this pattern broadly, treat any workflow call that uses a remote reusable workflow from a different repository with master as an intentional design choice rather than a vulnerability.

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 (2)

.github/workflows/bot-autoassign-pr-issue-link.yml (2)

4-4: LGTM!

---

9-10: 🩺 Stability & Availability

no change needed.

cancel-in-progress: true is already set, so newer runs in this PR-specific concurrency group cancel in-progress validation runs.

			> Likely an incorrect or invalid review comment.

[nemesifier]

@coderabbitai resolve

[coderabbitai]

✅ Action performed

Comments resolved and changes approved.