Use wrapApiConfigurationError more for init-action-post

[mbg]

This PR adds wrapApiConfigurationError handling to the general exception handler for the init-action-post step. Also includes some related, minor improvements.

Risk assessment

For internal use only. Please select the risk level of this change:

• Low risk: Changes are fully under feature flags, or have been fully tested and validated in pre-production environments and are highly observable, or are documentation or test only.

Which use cases does this change impact?

Workflow types:

• Advanced setup - Impacts users who have custom CodeQL workflows.
• Managed - Impacts users with dynamic workflows (Default Setup, Code Quality, ...).

Products:

• Code Scanning - The changes impact analyses when analysis-kinds: code-scanning.
• Code Quality - The changes impact analyses when analysis-kinds: code-quality.
• Other first-party - The changes impact other first-party analyses.
• Third-party analyses - The changes affect the upload-sarif action.

Environments:

• Dotcom - Impacts CodeQL workflows on github.com and/or GitHub Enterprise Cloud with Data Residency.
• GHES - Impacts CodeQL workflows on GitHub Enterprise Server.

How did/will you validate this change?

• Unit tests - I am depending on unit test coverage (i.e. tests in .test.ts files).
• End-to-end tests - I am depending on PR checks (i.e. tests in pr-checks).

If something goes wrong after this change is released, what are the mitigation and rollback strategies?

• Rollback - Change can only be disabled by rolling back the release or releasing a new version with a fix.

How will you know if something goes wrong after this change is released?

• Telemetry - I rely on existing telemetry or have made changes to the telemetry.
  • Dashboards - I will watch relevant dashboards for issues after the release. Consider whether this requires this change to be released at a particular time rather than as part of a regular release.
  • Alerts - New or existing monitors will trip if something goes wrong with this change.

Are there any special considerations for merging or releasing this change?

• No special considerations - This change can be merged at any time.

Merge / deployment checklist

• Confirm this change is backwards compatible with existing workflows.
• Consider adding a changelog entry for this change.
• Confirm the readme and docs have been updated if necessary.

[Copilot]

Warning

• Copilot's review of this pull request may be incomplete because some of the changed files are excluded by your Copilot content exclusion settings. See Excluding content from Copilot for details.

Copilot review overview

🟡 Changes recommended

The newly added API rejection behavior lacks direct unit coverage.

Get a fresh assessment by requesting another Copilot review.

Review effort: Balanced
Findings: 1

Open (1)

• Add rejection-path test for getGitHubVersionFromApi · New

What changed in this PR

Improves configuration-error classification during init-action-post.

Changes:

• Reuses the saved GitHub version when available.
• Wraps known API failures as configuration errors.
• Documents and types the error wrapper.

File	Description
src/​init-action-post.ts	Reuses configuration and classifies API errors.
src/​api-client.ts	Wraps GitHub version API failures.
lib/​entry-points.js	Generated, excluded file; not reviewed.

Files excluded by content exclusion policy (1)

• lib/entry-points.js

---

💡 Add a code-review agent skill or configure MCP servers for context-aware, tailored reviews. Learn more in the docs.

[mbg]

@mario-campos I pushed three more commits here. The first two just refactor the existing tests for wrapApiConfigurationError and don't change them. The third adds one additional test to check that wrapApiConfigurationError(wrapApiConfigurationError(err)) == wrapApiConfigurationError(err), i.e. it doesn't double-wrap errors. I wanted to make sure that the added wrapApiConfigurationError call in the error handler in run doesn't accidentally break the case where the caught "unwrappedError" was already run through wrapApiConfigurationError previously.

[mario-campos]

Makes sense 👍

One minor suggestion: I don't see a test for the wrapApiConfigurationError fallback/identity path (i.e. the one in which you pass a non-error value and it is returned). If it already exists and I just missed it, feel free to ignore.

[mbg]

I don't see a test for the wrapApiConfigurationError fallback/identity path (i.e. the one in which you pass a non-error value and it is returned).

@mario-campos Several of the tests for wrapApiConfigurationError exercise this. For example, while the "wrapApiConfigurationError doesn't wrap errors it isn't supposed to" test talks about "errors", anything that is passed into wrapApiConfigurationError that isn't like a HTTPError goes through the fallback/identity path. See the t.is assertions that check that result of wrapApiConfigurationError matches what we provided as argument (by object identity).