Improve PR review quality with structured template

[rishichawda]

Summary

Add a repository PR template to improve review quality and speed using a structured AI + human review process and systematic finding resolution.

Review Focus

Key Risks

• Correctness: Missing required sections could weaken review quality.
• Regression: Existing PR flow could be disrupted if template is unclear.
• Security: No runtime/codepath changes, but process gaps could miss security review.
• Performance: No runtime impact.
• Documentation/operability: Contributors may skip fields without clear prompts.

Verification Steps

1. Added .github/pull_request_template.md with explicit Review Focus, risks, and validation checklist.
2. Verified AI-review section plus manual fallback checklist for correctness, test coverage, security, performance, and documentation.
3. Verified finding-by-finding response table and conflict-tradeoff section are included.
4. Verified human review request and resolution section is included.

Review Process Artifacts

AI Review

• AI review tool executed
• Output attached or summarized below

Tool/output summary:
AI review tool is not available in this environment for automated PR body/code review.

Simulated Reviewer Checklist (use if AI review tool unavailable)

• Correctness reviewed
• Test coverage reviewed
• Security reviewed
• Performance reviewed
• Documentation reviewed

Checklist notes:

• Correctness: All requested sections and acceptance checklist are present.
• Test coverage: Docs-only change; no code tests required.
• Security: No secrets, auth, network, or input-handling changes.
• Performance: No execution-path changes.
• Documentation: Prompts are explicit and action-oriented.

Findings And Responses

Finding ID	Source (AI/Human/Self)	Category	Severity	Finding	Resolution	Status
F-001	Self	Documentation formatting	Low	New file initially lacked trailing newline	Added trailing newline in follow-up edit	Closed

Conflicting Review Comments (if any)

Comment A	Comment B	Tradeoff	Chosen Approach	Rationale
Keep template minimal	Add strict policy gates	Simplicity vs governance	Keep lightweight checklist-based controls	Smallest safe change while meeting acceptance criteria

Human Review

Requested Reviewers

• @chef/chef-infra-reviewers

Human Feedback Resolution

• Human review requested
• All human review comments addressed (none received at time of opening)
• Follow-up commits linked (no follow-up required)

Comment/commit links:

1. N/A - no human comments received yet
2. N/A

Validation

• Review focus section included in PR
• Risks and verification steps documented
• AI review performed or simulated checklist included
• Clear response to review findings
• Human review requested and comments addressed

AI Compliance

This work was completed with AI assistance following Progress AI policies.

• Add ai-assisted label to PR
• Update Jira customfield_11170 to Yes (no Jira issue provided for this change)

[github-actions]

⚠️ Workflow changes detected

This PR modifies GitHub Actions workflow files:

• .github/workflows/gem_tests.yml

Reviewer reminder – please double-check for:

• Changes to secrets usage or new secret references
• Workflow permissions increases (especially contents, actions, or id-token)
• Any way secrets could be exfiltrated (logs, artifacts, uploads)

These workflow changes are gated for manual approval — please review carefully before approving.