Files
starter-workflows/agentic/markdown-linter.md
T

171 lines
4.4 KiB
Markdown
Raw Normal View History

2026-04-10 08:52:52 +02:00
---
description: Runs Markdown quality checks using Super Linter and creates issues for violations
on:
workflow_dispatch:
schedule:
- cron: "0 14 * * 1-5" # 2 PM UTC, weekdays only
permissions:
contents: read
actions: read
issues: read
pull-requests: read
safe-outputs:
create-issue:
expires: 2d
title-prefix: "[linter] "
labels: [automation, code-quality]
noop:
name: Markdown Linter
timeout-minutes: 15
imports:
- shared/reporting.md
jobs:
super_linter:
runs-on: ubuntu-latest
permissions:
contents: read
packages: read
statuses: write
steps:
- name: Checkout repository
uses: actions/checkout@v6.0.2
with:
fetch-depth: 0
persist-credentials: false
- name: Super-linter
uses: super-linter/super-linter@v8.5.0
id: super-linter
env:
GITHUB_TOKEN: ${{ secrets.GITHUB_TOKEN }}
CREATE_LOG_FILE: "true"
LOG_FILE: super-linter.log
DEFAULT_BRANCH: main
ENABLE_GITHUB_ACTIONS_STEP_SUMMARY: "true"
VALIDATE_MARKDOWN: "true"
VALIDATE_ALL_CODEBASE: "false"
- name: Check for linting issues
id: check-results
run: |
if [ -f "super-linter.log" ] && [ -s "super-linter.log" ]; then
if grep -qE "ERROR|WARN|FAIL" super-linter.log; then
echo "needs-linting=true" >> "$GITHUB_OUTPUT"
else
echo "needs-linting=false" >> "$GITHUB_OUTPUT"
fi
else
echo "needs-linting=false" >> "$GITHUB_OUTPUT"
fi
- name: Upload super-linter log
if: always()
uses: actions/upload-artifact@v7
with:
name: super-linter-log
path: super-linter.log
retention-days: 7
steps:
- name: Download super-linter log
uses: actions/download-artifact@v8
with:
name: super-linter-log
path: /tmp/gh-aw/
tools:
cache-memory: true
edit:
bash:
- "*"
---
# Markdown Quality Report
You are an expert documentation quality analyst. Your task is to analyze the Super Linter Markdown output and create a comprehensive issue report for the repository maintainers.
## Context
- **Repository**: ${{ github.repository }}
- **Triggered by**: @${{ github.actor }}
- **Run ID**: ${{ github.run_id }}
## Your Task
1. **Read the linter output** from `/tmp/gh-aw/super-linter.log` using the bash tool
2. **Analyze the findings**:
- Categorize errors by severity (critical, high, medium, low)
- Identify patterns in the errors
- Determine which errors are most important to fix first
- Note: This workflow only validates Markdown files
3. **Create a detailed issue** with the following structure:
### Issue Title
Use format: "Markdown Quality Report - [Date] - [X] issues found"
### Issue Body Structure
```markdown
## 🔍 Markdown Linter Summary
**Date**: [Current date]
**Total Issues Found**: [Number]
**Run ID**: ${{ github.run_id }}
## 📊 Breakdown by Severity
- **Critical**: [Count and brief description]
- **High**: [Count and brief description]
- **Medium**: [Count and brief description]
- **Low**: [Count and brief description]
## 📁 Issues by Category
### [Category/Rule Name]
- **File**: `path/to/file`
- Line [X]: [Error description]
- Suggested fix: [How to resolve]
[Repeat for other categories]
## 🎯 Priority Recommendations
1. [Most critical issue to address first]
2. [Second priority]
3. [Third priority]
## 📋 Full Linter Output
<details>
<summary>Click to expand complete linter log</summary>
```
[Include the full linter output here]
```
</details>
## 🔗 References
- [Link to workflow run](${{ github.server_url }}/${{ github.repository }}/actions/runs/${{ github.run_id }})
- [Super Linter Documentation](https://github.com/super-linter/super-linter)
```
## Important Guidelines
- **Be concise but thorough**: Focus on actionable insights
- **Prioritize issues**: Not all linting errors are equal
- **Provide context**: Explain why each type of error matters for documentation quality
- **Suggest fixes**: Give practical recommendations
- **Use proper formatting**: Make the issue easy to read and navigate
- **If no errors found**: Call `noop` celebrating clean markdown
**Important**: Always call exactly one safe-output tool before finishing (`create_issue` or `noop`).
```json
{"noop": {"message": "No action needed: [brief explanation of what was analyzed and why]"}}
```