Improve documentation of workflow_run

[makeable]

Code of Conduct

• I have read and agree to the GitHub Docs project's Code of Conduct

What article on docs.github.com is affected?

https://docs.github.com/developers/webhooks-and-events/webhooks/webhook-events-and-payloads#workflow_run
workflow_run is not well documented. There is NO information on what is contained in the workflow_run object in the payload

What part(s) of the article would you like to see updated?

I would like to see documentation explaining what is contained in the object. At present it just says "required"

Additional information

This has been raised a number of times and just gets closed.

[welcome]

Thanks for opening this issue. A GitHub docs team member should be by to give feedback soon. In the meantime, please check out the contributing guidelines.

[makeable]

From further investigation, it seems that the openAPI descriptors may be at fault. If you choose a different action type other than completed then the payload displays. These seem to be generated automatically by some github internal process, so I guess it needs to be resolved there.,

[cmwilson21]

@makeable Thanks so much for opening an issue! I'll triage this for the team to take a look 👀

[skedwards88]

Thanks for opening this issue! This looks like a bug that we need to fix internally, so I'm going close this issue and open an internal issue for our engineering team.

[rebwill]

I am not sure what fix was made on this a few months back, but the workflow_run event payload documentation is still lacking any reference for the workflow_run object.

About two weeks ago, I briefly saw a dropdown here under the workflow_run object that contained this information -- similar to what appears under the properties of workflow_job.deployment. However that dropdown disappeared the next time I reloaded the page, and I have not seen it again. I tried in Firefox and Chrome in case it was a browser issue, but no luck.

I believe this issue should be reopened.

[cmwilson21]

@rebwill Thanks for the added context! Would you mind opening a new issue with this information? Please link to this issue as well 👍

Then I get this triaged for review again 💖