What evidence should a review-readiness gate require?

[daichunghy]

PatchGate is intentionally narrow: it does not try to decide whether code is correct or whether a contributor used AI. It asks whether a pull request has supplied the trusted policy, commit-bound evidence, ownership and human boundaries required before a maintainer spends review time.

I would like to collect concrete maintainer edge cases before the evaluator and Action move beyond the current beta candidate. Which of these would matter most in your repository?

• a successful check from the wrong commit or workflow source
• a pull request that changes policy and tries to relax its own requirements
• a sensitive path without a qualified human approval
• incomplete changed-path, CODEOWNERS or permission data
• a reviewability threshold that creates too much noise

Please describe one real or representative scenario, what evidence you currently trust, and what result you would expect from a review-readiness gate. Critical feedback is welcome; this thread is for requirements discovery, not endorsements.