Enhance publish-docs workflow: Include triggering upstream PR details in autogenerated docs PRs

[Copilot]

Description

The publish-docs workflow generates PRs against the docs repository without context about the triggering upstream change. This makes it difficult for reviewers to trace documentation updates back to source code changes.

Changes

Added context extraction step that detects trigger type and formats rich PR descriptions:

1. Merged PRs - Extracts PR number and title from squash merge commit messages using pattern \(#([0-9]+)\)$

   • Title: Update auto-generated documentation (PR #1234)
   • Body: Links to upstream PR, includes title, author, branch, commit SHA

2. Direct commits - Captures commit metadata for non-PR changes

   • Title: Update auto-generated documentation (main)
   • Body: Branch name, commit link, author, commit message

3. Manual triggers - Identifies workflow_dispatch invocations

   • Title: Update auto-generated documentation (manual trigger)
   • Body: Trigger source, actor, branch, commit

Implementation:

• Extracted trigger detection logic to .github/scripts/prepare-docs-pr-context.sh for local testability
• Workflow passes GitHub context via environment variables
• Uses ${{ github.ref_name }} to preserve full branch names (e.g., release/0.32)
• No API calls or additional permissions required

Files Changed

• New: .github/scripts/prepare-docs-pr-context.sh - Standalone script containing PR context preparation logic
• Modified: .github/workflows/publish-docs.yaml - Simplified to call the script with environment variables

Before

Title: Update auto-generated documentation
Body:  GitHub SHA: abc123

After

Title: Update auto-generated documentation (PR #1234)
Body:
  **Pull Request:** #1234 - Fix CLI command docs
  **Author:** Jane Developer
  **Branch:** release/0.32
  **Commit:** abc123

Type of change

• This pull request adds or changes features of Radius and has an approved issue (issue link required).

Contributor checklist

Please verify that the PR meets the following requirements, where applicable:

• An overview of proposed schema changes is included in a linked GitHub issue.
  • Not applicable
• A design document PR is created in the design-notes repository, if new APIs are being introduced.
  • Not applicable
• The design document has been reviewed and approved by Radius maintainers/approvers.
  • Not applicable
• A PR for the samples repository is created, if existing samples are affected by the changes in this PR.
  • Not applicable
• A PR for the documentation repository is created, if the changes in this PR affect the documentation or any user facing updates are made.
  • Not applicable
• A PR for the recipes repository is created, if existing recipes are affected by the changes in this PR.
  • Not applicable

Original prompt

---

This section details on the original issue you should resolve

<issue_title>Enhance publish-docs workflow: Include triggering upstream PR details in autogenerated docs PRs</issue_title>
<issue_description>## Background

The current .github/workflows/publish-docs.yaml workflow in the radius repository generates a pull request (PR) against the docs repository whenever reference documentation is auto-generated. However, the resulting PR that is created is sparse on details and does not make it clear which upstream PR or commit triggered the workflow to run.

Request

Please update the publish-docs workflow so that the auto-generated documentation PR includes clear information on:

• The upstream PR (or commit) in the radius repo that triggered the workflow.
• Preferably, a link to that upstream PR or commit and basic context (such as PR title/author or commit message).

This will make it easier for reviewers and maintainers to understand the source of documentation changes and trace them back to the originating changes in the codebase.

File reference: radius-project/radius/.github/workflows/publish-docs.yaml

---

Acceptance Criteria

• Auto-generated documentation PRs should include upstream PR/commit details in the PR title and/or body
• Information must include at least a link to the upstream PR/commit, and ideally context such as PR title/author
• Implementation should be documented or commented if workaround is required

/cc @radius-project/maintainers</issue_description>

Comments on the Issue (you are @copilot in this section)

• Fixes Enhance publish-docs workflow: Include triggering upstream PR details in autogenerated docs PRs #11158

---

💡 You can make Copilot smarter by setting up custom instructions, customizing its development environment and configuring Model Context Protocol (MCP) servers. Learn more Copilot coding agent tips in the docs.

[github-actions]

Unit Tests

    2 files  +  1    415 suites  +85   6m 38s ⏱️ -20s
4 872 tests +  5  4 870 ✅ +  6  2 💤 ±0  0 ❌  - 1 
5 774 runs  +908  5 772 ✅ +909  2 💤 ±0  0 ❌  - 1 

Results for commit 98961a6. ± Comparison against base commit c41f296.

This pull request removes 1 and adds 6 tests. Note that renamed tests count towards both.

TestMain

github.com/radius-project/radius/cmd/rad/cmd ‑ Test_HandlePanic
github.com/radius-project/radius/cmd/rad/cmd ‑ Test_prettyPrintJSON
github.com/radius-project/radius/cmd/rad/cmd ‑ Test_prettyPrintJSON/formats_JSON_correctly
github.com/radius-project/radius/cmd/rad/cmd ‑ Test_prettyPrintJSON/formats_complex_objects
github.com/radius-project/radius/cmd/rad/cmd ‑ Test_prettyPrintJSON/handles_invalid_JSON
github.com/radius-project/radius/cmd/rad/cmd ‑ Test_prettyPrintRPError

♻️ This comment has been updated with latest results.

[Copilot]

Pull request overview

Updates the publish-docs GitHub Actions workflow so autogenerated PRs to the docs repo include richer context about what triggered the docs generation (merged PR vs direct commit vs manual dispatch), improving traceability back to Radius changes.

Changes:

• Add a workflow step to infer trigger context from the triggering commit message and build a formatted PR title/body.
• Use the generated title/body outputs when creating the docs pull request.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 51.38%. Comparing base (d03e8ef) to head (98961a6).
⚠️ Report is 2 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main   #11159      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   51.42%   51.38%   -0.05%     
==========================================
  Files         699      699              
  Lines       55723    44111   -11612     
==========================================
- Hits        28654    22665    -5989     
+ Misses      24901    19278    -5623     
  Partials     2168     2168              

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.
• 📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

[github-actions]

Dependency Review Summary

The full dependency review summary was too large to display here (1461KB, limit is 1024KB).

Please download the artifact named "dependency-review-summary" to view the complete report.

View full job summary

[DariuszPorowski]

I do not want to block so far, so let move... idea for the future - we can reduce complexity by using https://github.com/radius-project/.github/blob/820618e948e92d911ba3ac46a80e8169d5e3a4d4/.github/workflows/sync.yml#L55 and avoid maintaining own custom script.

[radius-functional-tests]

Radius functional test overview

🔍 Go to test action run

Click here to see the test run details

Name	Value
Repository	radius-project/radius
Commit ref	98961a6
Unique ID	funcd1c12e4bee
Image tag	pr-funcd1c12e4bee

• gotestsum 1.13.0
• KinD: v0.29.0
• Dapr: 1.14.4
• Azure KeyVault CSI driver: 1.4.2
• Azure Workload identity webhook: 1.3.0
• Bicep recipe location ghcr.io/radius-project/dev/test/testrecipes/test-bicep-recipes/<name>:pr-funcd1c12e4bee
• Terraform recipe location http://tf-module-server.radius-test-tf-module-server.svc.cluster.local/<name>.zip (in cluster)
• applications-rp test image location: ghcr.io/radius-project/dev/applications-rp:pr-funcd1c12e4bee
• dynamic-rp test image location: ghcr.io/radius-project/dev/dynamic-rp:pr-funcd1c12e4bee
• controller test image location: ghcr.io/radius-project/dev/controller:pr-funcd1c12e4bee
• ucp test image location: ghcr.io/radius-project/dev/ucpd:pr-funcd1c12e4bee
• deployment-engine test image location: ghcr.io/radius-project/deployment-engine:latest

Test Status

⌛ Building Radius and pushing container images for functional tests...
✅ Container images build succeeded
⌛ Publishing Bicep Recipes for functional tests...
✅ Recipe publishing succeeded
⌛ Starting corerp-cloud functional tests...
⌛ Starting ucp-cloud functional tests...
✅ ucp-cloud functional tests succeeded
✅ corerp-cloud functional tests succeeded