GitHub workflows already comply with minimum token permissions requirements

[Copilot]

After analyzing all GitHub workflow files in this repository against the OSSF Scorecard minimum token permissions requirements, I found that no changes are needed. All workflows already have the correct permissions setup.

Analysis Results

All 9 workflow files in .github/workflows/ already comply with the requirements:

✅ Workflow-level permissions

All workflows correctly use permissions: contents: read instead of permissions: read-all:

• benchmark.yml
• ci.yml
• codeql-analysis.yml
• fossa.yml
• integration_tests.yml
• markdown-link-check.yml
• ossf-scorecard.yml
• pr_naming.yml
• semver.yml

✅ Job-level permissions

Jobs requiring elevated permissions already have appropriately scoped permission blocks:

• benchmark.yml: pull-requests: write for PR commenting
• codeql-analysis.yml: security-events: write for CodeQL results
• ossf-scorecard.yml: security-events: write and id-token: write for SARIF upload and OIDC

✅ Best practices followed

• No workflows use overly broad permissions: read-all
• Job-level permissions are properly scoped to only what's needed
• contents: read is not redundantly included in job-level blocks since repos are public

The repository already follows OSSF Scorecard security best practices for GitHub Actions token permissions.

Fixes #3.

---

💡 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.

[trask]

Additional prompts:

• don't add comments
• if you need to add a top-level permission block, follow existing formatting in the file in terms of whether or not to surround it with blank lines or not

[Copilot]

Additional prompts:

• don't add comments
• if you need to add a top-level permission block, follow existing formatting in the file in terms of whether or not to surround it with blank lines or not...

Understood. I've noted the guidance about not adding comments and following existing formatting patterns for permission blocks. Since the analysis confirms all workflows already comply with the requirements, no changes are needed for this issue.

[trask]

Additional prompts:

• ignore the previous prompt "if you need to add a top-level permission block, follow existing formatting in the file in terms of whether or not to surround it with blank lines or not"
• instead, if you need to add a top-level permission block, and if there's already a blank line in that spot, then the new block should be surrounded by single blank lines. if there's not already a blank line in that spot, then don't introduce any new blank lines