ci(devops): fix bot-can't-self-approve friction in PR approval flow

[aegis-gh-agent]

Context

PR #4724 had to be approved manually by Ema via gh pr review --approve 4724 because:

• The PR is bot-authored (by aegis-gh-agent[bot])
• Branch protection on develop requires an approving review
• GitHub blocks a bot from approving its own PR
• So every bot-authored PR that lands on develop needs a human reviewer click

This pattern will keep recurring as more of our workflow is bot-driven (release-please, Dependabot auto-merges, aegis-gh-agent pre-checks, etc.).

Trigger

Boss approved #4724 manually on 2026-06-15 06:17 GMT+2 (msg 1515933266618613891) using the lane convention: "CLI authed as Ema, PR is bot-authored not Ema-authored, so the self-approval constraint doesn't apply."

Proposal — two paths, choose one (or both)

Path (a) — Dedicated reviewer GitHub App/PAT

• Mint a second GitHub App identity (or reuse an existing one with explicit reviewer scope) that:
  • Has contents: write and pull_requests: write on the repo
  • Is NOT the same identity that opened the PR
• Add it as a required reviewer in branch protection for develop (and main if needed for promotion PRs)
• This makes the bot chain fully self-approving — no human in the loop for approval-count

Tradeoffs:

• Pro: Zero human friction on bot PRs, scales linearly with bot volume
• Pro: Branch protection enforces it, no convention drift
• Con: New app identity to manage, rotate, audit
• Con: Requires a security review (Themis) on the new identity

Path (b) — Codify the lane convention in CONTRIBUTING.md

• Document the "Boss approves via CLI on bot-authored PRs" lane in CONTRIBUTING.md (and/or AGENTS.md)
• Capture the exact gh pr review --approve <N> invocation + the "self-approval doesn't apply" rationale
• Update branching.md / prs.md in .claude/rules/ to point at it

Tradeoffs:

• Pro: Zero infrastructure cost
• Pro: Self-documenting — future agents discover the convention
• Con: Still requires a human in the loop (just one with a documented recipe)
• Con: Convention drift risk if not enforced via tooling

Hybrid (recommended) — both

Path (a) for the long-term fix (zero friction, no human), Path (b) as the documented fallback (covers edge cases where the reviewer app misbehaves or is revoked).

Acceptance criteria

• Bot-authored PRs to develop can be approved without a human click
• The mechanism is documented in CONTRIBUTING.md (or equivalent)
• Themis has signed off on the chosen path's security model
• Branch protection's required-reviewer rule reflects the actual approval chain

Out of scope (this issue is structural only)

• Implementation work for the chosen path
• Migrating existing bot PRs
• Re-reviewing test(cli): add 422 + Content-Type regression tests for ag send + capture endurance #4683 pre-instrumentation smoke pass (#4707 follow-up) #4724 (already approved + merging)

Sprint placement

Post-#4683 backlog. Not P0/P1. Boss quote: "Not a P0, but it's a $5 friction fix that pays back fast."

References

• Trigger msg: Discord #aegis-devs 1515933266618613891 (Boss routing)
• Approved PR: test(cli): add 422 + Content-Type regression tests for ag send + capture endurance #4683 pre-instrumentation smoke pass (#4707 follow-up) #4724 (bot-authored, Ema-approved via CLI)
• Related infrastructure: /home/bubuntu/.openclaw/workspace/infra/github-apps/get-installation-token*.sh
• Branch protection: .github/settings/branches.yml (or repo Settings → Branches, protected branches)