Self-review on PR #9 flagged two doc-drift spots left over from the
explicit-secret-forwarding switch. Cosmetic.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
The first attempt failed at entrypoint.sh:61 'GITEA_TOKEN required' — with
explicit secrets (no `inherit`), secrets.GITEA_TOKEN resolves empty in the
reusable job. github.token comes from the github context (not a forwarded
secret), so it's present regardless. The forwarded provider/findings secrets
arrived correctly; only the auto-token sourcing was wrong.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
The swarm (reviewing the mort/executus rollout PRs) correctly flagged that
`secrets: inherit` forwards EVERY caller secret to the reusable review
workflow — registry/deploy/db creds the reviewer never touches. Fix:
- review-reusable.yml: declare workflow_call.secrets (all optional) so a
caller can forward only what the reviewer needs.
- adversarial-review.yml (gadfly's own caller) + examples/reusable.yml:
replace `secrets: inherit` with an explicit forward of just
OLLAMA_CLOUD_API_KEY / CLAUDE_CODE_OAUTH_TOKEN / findings tokens.
GITEA_TOKEN stays automatic.
- Docs (README, examples) updated; also advise pinning consumers to an
immutable @<sha> instead of @main (supply-chain, the other finding).
gadfly's own review on this PR exercises the explicit-secrets path (local
reusable ref) — validating it on the act_runner before mort/executus adopt it.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
Steve Dudenhoeffer