Feature Request: Add option to disable Claude Code Report in GitHub Step Summary (original) (raw)

Problem Description

Currently, the Claude Code Action automatically adds a "Claude Code Report" section to the GitHub Step Summary that displays the entire JSON execution output. This happens in the "Display Claude Code Report" step (lines 183-191 in action.yml):

While this is useful for debugging, it can conflict with custom formatting solutions that process the execution output.

Use Case

I've created a Claude Output Formatter GitHub Action that takes the Claude execution JSON and formats it into a more readable markdown format with:

However, when using both actions together, the GitHub Step Summary shows:

  1. The raw JSON from Claude Code Action's "Claude Code Report"
  2. The nicely formatted output from my formatter

This creates duplicate information and makes the step summary unnecessarily long.

Proposed Solution

Add an optional input parameter to control whether the Claude Code Report is displayed:

inputs: display_report: description: "Whether to display the Claude Code Report in GitHub Step Summary" required: false default: "true"

Then modify the Display Claude Code Report step to check this input:

Benefits

  1. Backward compatibility: Default behavior remains unchanged
  2. Flexibility: Users can opt out when using custom formatting
  3. Cleaner output: Avoids duplicate information in step summaries
  4. Better integration: Enables third-party tools to provide enhanced formatting

Example Usage

Users could then disable the default report when using custom formatting:

Alternative Solutions Considered

  1. Clearing the step summary after Claude Code Action runs - This works but feels hacky and might clear other important information
  2. Forking the action - Creates maintenance burden and divergence from official action

Additional Context

The raw JSON in the Claude Code Report can be quite large (often hundreds of lines), making it difficult to find the actual formatted results below it when using custom formatting solutions.

Would you be open to accepting a PR for this feature? I'd be happy to implement it if you agree with the approach.