[kyle-sexton]

Refs: melodic-software/claude-code-plugins#9589

Summary

Registers the pr-review-cli.yml reusable-workflow contract at ci-workflows v0.65.5 (f1096608192c54cfb3dc252e36670e6f86700b9b), so callers pinned to that release pass runner-policy.

Fix

Copies the v0.65.4 entry (@31b44f3ffc7f208fb281dd2b64decce67c53d316) forward in components/runner-policy/policy.json and adds the matching copy-forward test in runner-policy.test.mjs, as #870 did. gh api compare v0.65.4...v0.65.5 on ci-workflows lists three changed files; the pr-review-cli.yml patch is comment-only (ci-workflows#878: a cost decision carries only from an unedited hold marker), so inputs, secrets and permissions are unchanged.

Verification

• node components/runner-policy/runner-policy.mjs --root <worktree>: Runner policy passed.
• node --test components/runner-policy/runner-policy.test.mjs: 347 tests, 347 pass, 0 fail.

Related

• chore(ci): re-pin the review callers to ci-workflows v0.65.5 claude-code-plugins#9589 (re-pins the review callers to v0.65.5)
• feat(runner-policy): register the ci-workflows v0.65.4 pr-review-cli contract #870 (the v0.65.4 contract)

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

Codex Review Summary

This comment shows the latest Codex review activity on this pull request.

Review	Status	Commit	Review trigger
📝 Code Review	✅ Completed 2026-10-24T07:06:44.781441Z	2117a55	Draft marked ready

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

• Open a pull request for review
• Mark a draft as ready
• Comment "@codex review" or "@codex security review".

Codex reacts with 👀 while any review is running, comments if it has suggestions, and reacts with 👍 once all reviews finish with no findings.

[github-actions]

claude-review reviewed 2117a554c920bafd08d34d86bfb28459a9be24d9: 0 finding(s), 0 as inline comments.

No findings.

The PR adds a pr-review-cli.yml@f1096608… entry to components/runner-policy/policy.json and a copy-forward test in runner-policy.test.mjs.

• Entry matches v0.65.4. I compared the new entry with the @31b44f3… entry in policy.json and they are identical: same routing, fixedRunsOn, 11 allowedInputs and 2 allowedSecrets. No input or secret was widened.
• Test is sound. The new test follows the pattern of the v0.65.4 test. It checks deep equality against the v0.65.4 entry and that exactly one entry exists for the new SHA.
• What I did not check. I did not run the test suite, and I did not verify the ci-workflows v0.65.5 diff. The claim that it changes only a comment is the author's and is unverified by me. The 347/347 test result is also the author's claim.
• Closing issue. The PR uses Refs: melodic-software/claude-code-plugins#9589 and closes nothing, so there are no acceptance criteria to check.
• PR body contract. The body has a Refs: line and the Summary, Fix, Verification and Related sections.
• Hold classes. The change touches no trusted-actors files, CODEOWNERS or .gitmodules, and adds no model spend or infrastructure. No hold applies.

[github-actions]

claude-security-review reviewed 2117a554c920bafd08d34d86bfb28459a9be24d9: 0 finding(s), 0 as inline comments.

Security review: PR #871 (head 2117a55)

No security findings.

critical-findings: 0

What changed:

• components/runner-policy/policy.json adds one approvedReusableWorkflowContracts entry for pr-review-cli.yml pinned to the full 40-character SHA f1096608192c54cfb3dc252e36670e6f86700b9b. The new entry is the only addition to that file.
• components/runner-policy/runner-policy.test.mjs adds a test asserting the new entry equals the v0.65.4 entry and appears exactly once.

Trust-boundary checks:

• I compared the new entry to the existing @31b44f3f… entry in the diff context. They are identical: hosted-only routing, fixedRunsOn: ["ubuntu-24.04"], the same 11 allowedInputs, and the same two allowedSecrets mappings (REVIEWS_CLAUDE_API_KEY, REVIEWS_CLAUDE_CODE_OAUTH_TOKEN).
• Nothing widens: no new input, secret, runner or routing. The entry is pinned to a full SHA, not a tag or branch, so there is no pin loosening.
• The change is data-only: no code, workflow, or instruction surface is altered, and no existing rule is removed or softened.
• The diff touches no plugin manifest, so there are no manifest <field> lines.
• The diff touches no trust-gate path (trusted-actors, check-trusted-trigger, CODEOWNERS, .gitmodules), so hold is none.

Limitation: I could not confirm that the pinned SHA is the commit behind the ci-workflows v0.65.5 tag. The GitHub API call to resolve it needed approval, which I did not get. The PR's CI should cover that check. The pin is data in an allowlist, and an unreal or mismatched SHA would simply not resolve at call time.

The protected-class register was not consulted, because the diff removes no instructions.