docs: add format input to README inputs table

[UtkarshAnandd]

Description

This PR adds the missing format input to the Inputs table in the README. The description is based on its definition in action.yml, including the default value (junit) and support for multiple comma-separated formats.

It also points users to kubescape scan -h for the complete list of supported formats, which addresses the question raised in the issue about values other than sarif.

Related items (out of scope)

While working on this, I noticed two related items that I have left out of this PR to keep its scope focused:

• The format description in action.yml refers to an output input, but the actual input name is outputFile.
• The fixFiles input is used in the README examples but is not listed in the Inputs table.

I am happy to open a follow-up PR for these if that would be useful.

Fixes #66

Summary by CodeRabbit

• Documentation
  • Clarified that specifying multiple comma-separated formats creates a separate output file for each format, using the selected format as the file extension. Added a link to supported formats; the default remains junit.

[coderabbitai]

Navigate logical layers of code changes, visualize relationships, and explore their blast radius.

No actionable comments were generated in the recent review. 🎉

ℹ️ Recent review info

⚙️ Run configuration

• Configuration used: defaults
• Review profile: CHILL
• Plan: Advanced
• Run ID: 54fb5f50-e416-421f-a3e3-5b47203b0984

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between d65853c and 6bff8b1.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)

• README.md

Included review availability: This review used your included allowance. Your plan provides up to 1 included review per hour; 0 remain after this review.

---

📝 Walkthrough

Walkthrough

The README now describes comma-separated format values, one output file per format, output filename extensions, and how to find supported formats. It retains junit as the default.

Changes

Format input documentation

Layer / File(s)	Summary
Describe format input README.md	The format input description covers multiple formats, output filenames, and supported format information. The default remains junit.

Priority: ⬇️ Low

Estimated code review effort: 1 (Trivial) | ~3 minutes

Change: Other

Merge Risk: ⚪ Minimal · up to 6bff8

The README accurately describes the format input and resulting output files. No actionable merge-blocking risk remains.

Architecture Summary

Architecture risk: 🔵 Low · up to 6bff8

The change affects 1 system.

Changed systems: README.md

Architecture concerns
No architecture-level concerns identified.

Review details

Systems and components

• observed — README.md (service) was modified; 1 changed file maps to changed impact.

Before / after behavior

• observed — Modified behavior in README.md: The format description now documents comma-separated multiple formats, one output file per format named from outputFile with the corresponding extension, and how to find supported formats; the default remains junit.

🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 5

✅ Passed checks (5 passed)

Check name	Status	Explanation
Description Check	✅ Passed	Check skipped - CodeRabbit’s high-level summary is enabled.
Title check	✅ Passed	The title clearly and concisely states that the README Inputs table now documents the format input, which is the main change.
Linked Issues check	✅ Passed	Issue #66 asks the README Inputs section to list format and asks which formats it supports. The change adds the format input documentation, states the junit default and comma-separated format be…
Out of Scope Changes check	✅ Passed	The reported change adds one format documentation line to README.md. The change supports issue #66. The action.yml reference correction and fixFiles table entry remain out of scope and are not i…
Docstring Coverage	✅ Passed	No functions found in the changed files to evaluate docstring coverage. Skipping docstring coverage check. Docstring coverage is scoped to functions touched by this diff. Analyzed 0 functions across 0…

✨ Finishing Touches 💡 1

🛠️ Fix failing CI checks 💡

• Commit to this branch
• Create a new PR

🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)

• Create a new PR

• Autopilot · Keep fixing CodeRabbit findings and required CI, and resolving merge conflicts

---

Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ Share

• X
• Mastodon
• Reddit
• LinkedIn

_{Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands.}

[matthyx]

Approve: the README-only change is needed and consistent with the existing action contract. No blocking findings.

Reviewed head 6bff8b15373fd4f2a06bd23492d603b8ee36a835 against main at d65853c2832df0d379201ceaea331b5820ab9070.

• Necessity: #66 reports the missing input, and the maintainer explicitly endorsed this documentation contribution targeting main. The target README still lacks the row. action.yml:73–88 defines the optional input, junit default, comma-separated formats and help command; entrypoint.sh:49–50,89 forwards the values. The new row also uses the correct outputFile input name.
• History: searched all returned PRs (62) and issues (20), across all states, by title/body using format, sarif, junit, outputFile, README and documentation; inspected relevant diffs and discussions. #27 added multiple-format metadata, and #18 fixed outputFile forwarding; neither supplies this missing README row. Open #81 edits other README sections and does not supersede this change. Closed #8 says the README had changed, and #73/#74 were already addressed on main, rather than rejecting this approach. No applicable prior rejection found. Search was limited to accessible repository records and selected discussion threads, not exhaustive comment-text search; absence of a match is not proof none exists.
• Validation: independently reviewed the exact diff and input-to-CLI path in two review lanes; architecture CLEAR. A local text assertion confirms the base lacks the row and the head adds exactly one three-column row with balanced inline code and the stated examples. git diff --no-index --check reported no whitespace errors (exit 1 denotes the differing files). No runtime, container, build or Markdown lint tests were run; none of the execution paths changes here.
• CI: DCO, GitGuardian and CodeRabbit succeeded. The autofix job failed at checkout because its existing pull_request_target workflow refuses fork code, before scanning. This is unrelated to the added row; it is not evidence of passing runtime validation. Current branch protection/rules require approval but configure no required status checks. The PR is non-draft and mergeable.

Scope is appropriate: no runtime, API, dependency, permission or configuration changes. The pre-existing metadata typo and missing fixFiles table entry can remain separate. Verdict: APPROVE for the reviewed commit; no merge performed.