Update GitHub Action hashintel/.github to a438cfc

[hash-worker]

This PR contains the following updates:

Package	Type	Update	Change
hashintel/.github (changelog)	action	digest	d76c839 → a438cfc

---

Configuration

📅 Schedule: (UTC)

• Branch creation
  • At any time (no schedule defined)
• Automerge
  • "before 4am every weekday,every weekend"

🚦 Automerge: Enabled.

♻ Rebasing: Whenever PR becomes conflicted, or you tick the rebase/retry checkbox.

🔕 Ignore: Close this PR and you won't be reminded about this update again.

---

• If you want to rebase/retry this PR, check this box

---

This PR has been generated by Mend Renovate.

[vercel]

The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for GitHub.

Project	Deployment	Actions	Updated (UTC)
hash	Ready	Preview, Comment	Jul 27, 2026 2:31pm
hashdotdesign-tokens	Ready	Preview, Comment	Jul 27, 2026 2:31pm
petrinaut	Ready	Preview, Comment	Jul 27, 2026 2:31pm

[cursor]

PR Summary

Low Risk
CI-only pin updates to external reusable workflows; no application or runtime code changes.

Overview
Bumps the pinned digest for shared hashintel/.github reusable workflows from d76c839 to a438cfc.

housekeeping.yml: the renovate job now calls housekeeping-dependencies.yml at the new ref.

preflight.yml: dependencies, todo-comments, and pr-title jobs now call their respective preflight-*.yml workflows at the same ref.

^{Reviewed by Cursor Bugbot for commit b91ddd9. Bugbot is set up for automated code reviews on this repo. Configure here.}

[codecov]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 59.31%. Comparing base (7d1473d) to head (b91ddd9).
⚠️ Report is 8 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main    #9110   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   59.31%   59.31%           
=======================================
  Files        1406     1406           
  Lines      135975   135975           
  Branches     6378     6378           
=======================================
+ Hits        80649    80650    +1     
+ Misses      54342    54341    -1     
  Partials      984      984           

Flag	Coverage Δ
apps.hash-ai-worker-ts	1.99% <ø> (ø)
apps.hash-api	12.08% <ø> (ø)
blockprotocol.type-system	40.84% <ø> (ø)
local.claude-hooks	0.00% <ø> (ø)
local.harpc-client	51.49% <ø> (ø)
local.hash-backend-utils	2.55% <ø> (ø)
local.hash-graph-sdk	10.02% <ø> (ø)
local.hash-isomorphic-utils	5.79% <ø> (ø)
rust.antsi	0.00% <ø> (ø)
rust.error-stack	90.89% <ø> (ø)
rust.harpc-codec	84.70% <ø> (ø)
rust.harpc-net	96.21% <ø> (+0.01%)	⬆️
rust.harpc-tower	67.03% <ø> (ø)
rust.harpc-types	0.00% <ø> (ø)
rust.harpc-wire-protocol	92.23% <ø> (ø)
rust.hash-codec	72.76% <ø> (ø)
rust.hash-graph-api	7.41% <ø> (ø)
rust.hash-graph-authorization	62.59% <ø> (ø)
rust.hash-graph-embeddings	91.88% <ø> (ø)
rust.hash-graph-postgres-store	26.04% <ø> (ø)
rust.hash-graph-store	38.71% <ø> (ø)
rust.hash-graph-temporal-versioning	47.95% <ø> (ø)
rust.hash-graph-types	0.00% <ø> (ø)
rust.hash-graph-validation	84.71% <ø> (ø)
rust.hashql-ast	89.63% <ø> (ø)
rust.hashql-compiletest	28.39% <ø> (ø)
rust.hashql-core	78.98% <ø> (ø)
rust.hashql-diagnostics	72.51% <ø> (ø)
rust.hashql-eval	79.82% <ø> (ø)
rust.hashql-hir	89.09% <ø> (ø)
rust.hashql-mir	87.92% <ø> (ø)
rust.hashql-syntax-jexpr	94.04% <ø> (ø)

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Harness.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.
• 📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

[codspeed-hq]

Merging this PR will degrade performance by 15.38%

❌ 2 regressed benchmarks
✅ 96 untouched benchmarks

Warning

Please fix the performance issues or acknowledge them on CodSpeed.

Performance Changes

	Benchmark	BASE	HEAD	Efficiency
❌	bit_matrix/dense/iter_row[64]	140.8 ns	170 ns	-17.16%
❌	bit_matrix/dense/iter_row[200]	185.8 ns	215 ns	-13.57%

Tip

Investigate this regression by commenting @codspeedbot fix this regression on this PR, or directly use the CodSpeed MCP with your agent.

---

_{Comparing deps/gha/hashintel-.github-digest (b91ddd9) with main (2b7e81d)}

[github-actions]

Benchmark results

@rust/hash-graph-benches – Integrations

policy_resolution_large

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: high, policies: 2002	$$25.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 175 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.191 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.42 \mathrm{ms} \pm 15.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.988 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 1002	$$12.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 98.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.693 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: high, policies: 3314	$$44.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 332 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}3.09 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$15.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 111 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.88 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: medium, policies: 1527	$$24.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 188 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}6.82 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 2078	$$26.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 163 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-4.821 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.76 \mathrm{ms} \pm 24.7 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.159 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 1033	$$13.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 104 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-7.545 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

policy_resolution_medium

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: high, policies: 102	$$3.71 \mathrm{ms} \pm 24.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.205 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.98 \mathrm{ms} \pm 15.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.677 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 52	$$3.34 \mathrm{ms} \pm 19.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.357 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: high, policies: 269	$$5.07 \mathrm{ms} \pm 26.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.508 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.57 \mathrm{ms} \pm 21.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.562 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: medium, policies: 108	$$4.13 \mathrm{ms} \pm 26.5 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.478 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 133	$$4.32 \mathrm{ms} \pm 21.5 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.778 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.53 \mathrm{ms} \pm 20.3 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.20 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 63	$$4.17 \mathrm{ms} \pm 25.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.10 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

policy_resolution_none

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: high, policies: 2	$$2.73 \mathrm{ms} \pm 13.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.55 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.56 \mathrm{ms} \pm 14.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.80 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 2	$$2.73 \mathrm{ms} \pm 17.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.84 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 8	$$2.96 \mathrm{ms} \pm 16.3 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.242 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.83 \mathrm{ms} \pm 18.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}3.38 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 3	$$2.94 \mathrm{ms} \pm 14.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.552 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

policy_resolution_small

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: high, policies: 52	$$3.02 \mathrm{ms} \pm 18.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.838 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.74 \mathrm{ms} \pm 19.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.011 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 26	$$2.91 \mathrm{ms} \pm 17.3 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.177 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: high, policies: 94	$$3.35 \mathrm{ms} \pm 15.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.285 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.97 \mathrm{ms} \pm 23.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-3.385 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: medium, policies: 27	$$3.22 \mathrm{ms} \pm 22.7 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-3.843 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 66	$$3.30 \mathrm{ms} \pm 16.3 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.063 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.99 \mathrm{ms} \pm 13.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.850 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 29	$$3.33 \mathrm{ms} \pm 27.5 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.48 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

read_scaling_complete

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
entity_by_id;one_depth	1 entities	$$42.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 251 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.352 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth	10 entities	$$34.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 191 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.860 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth	25 entities	$$37.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 249 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.71 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth	5 entities	$$33.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 259 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.62 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth	50 entities	$$42.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 303 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.356 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	1 entities	$$50.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 260 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.04 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	10 entities	$$42.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 233 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}4.96 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	25 entities	$$94.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 437 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.56 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	5 entities	$$35.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 168 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}3.21 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	50 entities	$$256 \mathrm{ms} \pm 891 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-6.274 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	1 entities	$$11.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 71.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}8.25 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	10 entities	$$11.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 74.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}10.1 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	25 entities	$$12.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 68.7 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}8.05 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	5 entities	$$11.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 64.5 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}4.79 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	50 entities	$$11.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 86.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}5.85 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

read_scaling_linkless

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
entity_by_id	1 entities	$$11.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 74.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}7.77 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	10 entities	$$11.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 63.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}5.92 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	100 entities	$$11.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 91.7 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}4.93 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	1000 entities	$$12.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 72.3 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}7.88 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	10000 entities	$$12.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 73.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}9.55 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

representative_read_entity

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/block/v/1	$$12.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 93.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}7.86 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/book/v/1	$$12.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 85.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}8.31 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/building/v/1	$$12.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 62.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}7.04 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/organization/v/1	$$12.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 63.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}8.44 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/page/v/2	$$12.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 66.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}7.62 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/person/v/1	$$12.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 94.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}7.76 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/playlist/v/1	$$12.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 57.5 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}7.65 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/song/v/1	$$12.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 75.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}6.90 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/uk-address/v/1	$$12.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 82.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}7.94 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

representative_read_entity_type

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
get_entity_type_by_id	Account ID: bf5a9ef5-dc3b-43cf-a291-6210c0321eba	$$8.89 \mathrm{ms} \pm 55.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}5.72 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

representative_read_multiple_entities

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=0	0	$$64.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 339 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}8.10 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=255	1,resolve_depths=inherit:1;values:255;properties:255;links:127;link_dests:126;type:true	$$115 \mathrm{ms} \pm 739 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}3.64 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:0;link_dests:0;type:false	$$70.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 336 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}5.57 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$82.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 631 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}7.30 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$91.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 407 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}7.19 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:2;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$95.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 589 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}4.93 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=0	0	$$47.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 616 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}7.75 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=255	1,resolve_depths=inherit:1;values:255;properties:255;links:127;link_dests:126;type:true	$$76.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 517 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}5.41 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:0;link_dests:0;type:false	$$53.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 386 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}6.14 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$63.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 472 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}6.30 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$65.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 360 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}4.44 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:2;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$65.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 530 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}5.22 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$

scenarios

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
full_test	query-limited	$$121 \mathrm{ms} \pm 430 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.500 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
full_test	query-unlimited	$$132 \mathrm{ms} \pm 458 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-2.519 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
linked_queries	query-limited	$$20.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 299 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}6.02 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
linked_queries	query-unlimited	$$545 \mathrm{ms} \pm 909 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-4.541 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph